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

[Final8y]

It's called business

How come you never moaned at ATI when they deliberately nobbled there own drivers to stop people using certain programs?

It would not surprise me if they have done it for the 5870 cards as well.

I have no idear what your on about.

Edit: i see Furmark mentioned, i was not aware of ATI stopping it from running on its hardware besides drivers throttling which would be fine if it was causing serious problems for the cards. but more importantly i don't recalled ATI stopping Furmark from running on competing hardware.

Consoles are not open platforms they are closed platforms so have a completely different business model to the PC.

 

[Final8y]

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.

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.

 

[Final8y]

Why hasn't this thread been locked? Its turning into your x is smaller than my x sort of thing you get with cars.

Because the few who don't like a a particular topic would just have to run in & sprout a few words to get a thread locked when it would be better to just remove the comments.

 

[Final8y]

Did you rename the furmark exe. And it was the 4*** cards that got hot. Please try to read the thread.

No i did not rename the exe, nether does it matter to this topic.

Here is the thread you should be in http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17997995

I know all about the 4*** problems with both programs & the reasons why.

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.

Notice the 3xxx being mentioned in that quote which i was replying to.

 

[Final8y]

Don't feed the troll

Indeed that why posted the relevant thread.

 

[Final8y]

So how does this work in practice? Do Nvidia give free graphics cards and support etc. to developers?

It makes Nvidia look a bit sly and sneaky alright but that's just business. I'm more surprised at a developer basically allowing their game to not work properly on other hardware. No in-game option for AA on an ATI card? Does than make the game better or worse? Obviously worse.

I suppose I could stick in my 8800 GTX just for the game but TBH I'm more likely to just not buy the game.

Giveing free hardware is normal practice in support.
If because of that games run better with less bug on that hardware then there is not problem.

 

[Final8y]

Nvidia reposnds to Batman:AA

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

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=235601

 

[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..

 

[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.

 

[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.
__________________

 

[Final8y]

http://tinylink.com/?aPqfgykT9P

Very good.
He Worked for NV & now for ATI.

 

[Final8y]

Bad link mate, tinylink it.

The link is good but the * is a censor that you must put the right letter in yourself.

 

[Final8y]

I know, my point was tiny link to avoid the censor

First time for everything, thanks.

http://tinylink.com/?aPqfgykT9P

 

[Final8y]

LOL. that is the first time that word has been used that i thought was funny.

 

[Final8y]

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

 

[Final8y]

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.

 

[Final8y]

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.

 

[Final8y]

The Nvidia specific implementation is guaranteed to work on Nvidia hardware - that's why it's enabled in the game. The fact that it works on ATI hardware is more than likely a convenient bonus, one that could break at any moment with a catalyst driver update.

If ATI can guarantee that the solution remains functional in future drivers, I'm sure the devs will have more confidence in enabling it on ATI hardware.

There is no such things as guaranteed to work on everything on the PC because of its open platform nature & the only time features or SW is stopped from working is if it is known not to work.

Many games when installing on vista64 pop up a warning that it has only been tested on windows 32bit & never does it deliberately stop you installing unless it is known not to work which i have yet to come across besides 16bit installers.

So the guaranteed excuse does not cut it.

 

[Final8y]

Hmm, why is it Nvidia's fault that AMD has shown such a gormless lack of awareness that it didn't bother to ensure that their users would have an AA option? There's no suggestion that AMD made any effort in this instance, at all.

Their response to this has been an ill-judged play-the-victim ploy predicated on them not having gained an ancillary benefit from Nvidia's investment, which is frankly ridiculous. It's that whole "realistic expectations" thing again; the engine doesn't support AA natively, it takes time and money to make it happen. Nvidia invested both, AMD invested nothing when they could have done so, and are calling sabotage as cover.

Please. Time to get your own house in order and deliver for your users on these things, for once.

The answers to your points have already been made many times in this thread already.

 

[Final8y]

Ok, so basically, if Nvidia help with some tech that can benefit ATI too, they won't share it? But if it's Vice versa, ATI will? Pretty much shows you the ethical/moral value of each company.

That is a fact.
But some people choose to ignore the gleamingly obvious fact because it suites them to.

Just because most people have a preference does not mean that it should get in the way of the facts.