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

wolvers · 28 Sep 2009 at 21:54

I'm not talking about using that kind of tactic. I'm talking about investing in game developers so that there's more top games out there that don't do that kind of thing.

Nelly · 28 Sep 2009 at 21:54

Additionally, the in-game AA option was removed when ATI cards are detected.

We were able to confirm this by changing the ids of ATI graphics cards in the Batman demo.

By tricking the application, we were able to get in-game AA option where our performance was significantly enhanced.

This option is not available for the retail game as there is a secure rom.

This about sums it all up, what more proof do you need?

If it worked in the Demo & not in the retail version it must have been done on purpose so that Nvidia Cards had an advantage.

It's probally the developers doing, but they might come back & say well Nvidia paid us to have control of the features . . . . now that will be interesting as the EU will EAT Nvidias money just like Intel's. :

Rroff · 28 Sep 2009 at 21:56

Final8y said:
I & others have posted links to reviews sites & users who that show that phyisx in certain games running on one core & but as usual you have no links to backup your comments with the games in question.

I'll get some pics if you like... tho I'd rather not waste my time...

kylew said:
You know Rroff, you act the victim a lot, have you ever wondered why it appears that people are 'ganging up' on you?

You do post some very provocative things without evidence, but demand everyone else supply you with this oh so important evidence.

Maybe people rag on you because you do what you claim others to be doing.

I wasn't demanding evidence my question was rhetorical - something that seems to be lost on you I've noticed in the past.

Lightnix said:
Well, it doesn't seem to take full advantage of my E5200, how is it supposed to do anything useful with a Core i7, or even a Core 2 Quad?

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k56/Lightynix/bmphysxnormal-1024768.png

Obviously with graphics toned down to emphasise CPU usage - PhysX setting is at 'normal', so paper flops around during fights and such.

"normal" settings and a dual core CPU aren't exactly good indicators of anything with physx... too many variables.

Final8y · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:00

wolvers69 said:
I'm not talking about using that kind of tactic. I'm talking about investing in game developers so that there's more top games out there that don't do that kind of thing.

That's like you going to MacDonald & having to pay an extra fee to ensure that your BidMac has not been phlegmd in.

sosrandom · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:01

Lightnix said:
Well, it doesn't seem to take full advantage of my E5200, how is it supposed to do anything useful with a Core i7, or even a Core 2 Quad?

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k56/Lightynix/bmphysxnormal-1024768.png

Obviously with graphics toned down to emphasise CPU usage - PhysX setting is at 'normal', so paper flops around during fights and such.

Running not running near 100% on both core doesnt mean its not taking full advantage of your cpu, infact that looks like its quite a lot of your CPU compaired to most games. Maybe if your compairing it to benchmarking, but its not a benchmark is it.

Rroff · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:01

Nelly said:
This about sums it all up, what more proof do you need?

If it worked in the Demo & not in the retail version it must have been done on purpose so that Nvidia Cards had an advantage.

It's probally the developers doing, but they might come back & say well Nvidia paid us to have control of the features . . . . now that will be interesting as the EU will EAT Nvidias money just like Intel's. :

I'm still holding off a final comment on this ... but from testing with my nVidia setup I get wildly varied benchmark results each time I run it so I hope they didn't just run off a couple of benchmarks and come to this conclusion about performance, heres my results:

Forced 16x AA: 14/279/54 (min/max/avg)
Forced 16x AA: 20/160/52
Ingame 16x AA: Crash
Ingame 16x AA: Crash

Forced 4x AA: 28/78/54
Forced 4x AA: 28/159/56
Ingame 4x AA: 27/80/55
Ingame 4x AA: 26/89/54

Pretty odd results even on an nVidia card.

Broken Hope · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:11

wolvers69 said:
Surely Nvidia are just getting something back from investing in game development? I don't get why ATI don't do the same. It's all very well taking the moral high ground but it's not really going to solve the problem.

ATI do help games developers, but when they do they do it in a way so everyone benefits, not just themselves. That's how it should be.

AMD has a very active ISV dev rel group that assists developers in making games better. If you hadn't noticed there was a body of DX10.1 games released, and guess how they manifested? When you start seeing DX11 games, again, guess how they came to be.

The ironic thing is, though, the dev rel group acts as a dev rel group and and assists the developer it making their title run better on a given API; in one case I know about, we not only did we spend time helping the developer optimise their title with DX10.1 but also spent time on thier own general DX10 path, meaning that everyone gets benefit - but, hey, perhaps thats just being "charitable".

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1331108&postcount=1355

Rroff · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:21

http://aten-hosted.com/images/batmanaa.jpg

Can't get any comparison pics which show it better atm coz my check point is a boss fight... don't think he'll leave me alone while I take some screenshots

reflux · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:25

Usual nonsense from Nvidia, I just wish they'd get on with it and produce some more cards worth buying.

=VTA=MANFACE · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:29

Doesn't surprise me. nVidia have finally lost it.

Rapid-D · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:30

I'm so glad I only ever buy Ati cards these days, as they offer the best value for money. But reading this makes me stay well clear of any Nvidia cards in the near future...

Final8y · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:34

Rroff said:
http://aten-hosted.com/images/batmanaa.jpg

Can't get any comparison pics which show it better atm coz my check point is a boss fight... don't think he'll leave me alone while I take some screenshots

Where is the source to where that pic came from, because it has to be independent source, other tasks can be loading the CPU.

Rroff · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:36

Final8y said:
Where is the source to where that pic came from, because it has to be independent source, other tasks can be loading the CPU.

Oh please I've got nothing better to do than fake up screen shots :rolleyes:

... whos to say the people making the alternative claim aren't faking it???

EDIT: Oh and the blacked out areas aren't extra tasks or anything sinister - I'd be more subtle than that if I was faking it up - just covering things that are covered by NDA.

AWPC · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:37

Whats the problem here. Really I mean Nvidia have invested a lot of time/money into their TWIMTBP program for quite a few years now and obviously they will optimise or configure for their cards only as thats why they invested the money in the first place :rolleyes:

DOH!!!

ATI really need to stop bitching and do the same but wait this is the same ATI who despite making the best graphics hardware for the last year refuse to put as much effort as Nvidia into their drivers let alone a dedicated game dev sponsor program in return for advertising.

If ATI had a bigger,better,faster drivers team with the same resource as Nvidia they would dominate and Nvidia would be in danger of going out of business. I had to reluctantly get rid of my ATI cards last year as I got so fed up with all the driver related issues some took months to get fixed even on recent games so I just ditched them and went for inferior Nvidia hardware just to have less hassle and spend more time gaming instead of waiting for ATI hotfixes (bluray playback was particular bad as ATI update their HDCP keys every month yet Nvidia give you a 2-3 month certificate).

Why on earth the people who run ATI cannot see this is a real eye opener :eek:

as they have the hardware to dominate their rival but not the drivers/dev support

LeJosh · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:39

I'm sorry but why don't Nvidia let their hardware do the talking instead of paying developers to develop specifically for their hardware? Their hardware is always on par or above so I don't see why the should have to cripple the software/engine aspects for ATi users.

Final8y · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:43

AWPC said:
Whats the problem here. Really I mean Nvidia have invested a lot of time/money into their TWIMTBP program for quite a few years now and obviously they will optimise or configure for their cards only as thats why they invested the money in the first place DOH!!!

ATI really need to stop bitching and do the same but wait this is the same ATI who despite making the best graphics hardware for the last year refuse to put as much effort as Nvidia into their drivers let alone a dedicated game dev sponsor program in return for advertising.

If ATI had a bigger,better,faster drivers team with the same resource as Nvidia they would dominate and Nvidia would be in danger of going out of business. I had to reluctantly get rid of my ATI cards last year as I got so fed up with all the driver related issues some took months to get fixed even on recent games so I just ditched them and went for inferior Nvidia hardware just to have less hassle and spend more time gaming instead of waiting for ATI hotfixes (bluray playback was particular bad as ATI update their HDCP keys every month yet Nvidia give you a 2-3 month certificate).

Why on earth the people who run ATI cannot see this is a real eye opener as they have the hardware to dominate their rival but not the drivers/dev support

There is a difference to paying for support & paying for sabotage.

Rroff · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:44

I love ATI's big contribution... tessellation... which in most cases you have to slow the game down and turn on wireframe to notice the difference... a feature almost no one has been asking for...

I don't deny it has some benefits and I'm quite a fan of polygon smoothing myself - but its hardly a ground breaking feature or something we couldn't move forward without.

Rroff · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:45

LeJosh said:
I'm sorry but why don't Nvidia let their hardware do the talking instead of paying developers to develop specifically for their hardware? Their hardware is always on par or above so I don't see why the should have to cripple the software/engine aspects for ATi users.

That is a bit worrying - but its nVidia for you

cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Final8y · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:48

Rroff said:
I love ATI's big contribution... tessellation... which in most cases you have to slow the game down and turn on wireframe to notice the difference... a feature almost no one has been asking for...

I don't deny it has some benefits and I'm quite a fan of polygon smoothing myself - but its hardly a ground breaking feature or something we couldn't move forward without.

I noticed the difference & yet you tell people to look closely to how things move with physx because they don't notice physx moving things any better than other methods.

LeJosh · 28 Sep 2009 at 22:49

Rroff said:
That is a bit worrying - but its nVidia for you cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Must cost them a lot which could be used for more purposeful developments. But they're loaded as it is so I don't think it bothers them.