http://games.ea.com/crysis/home.jsp
Keep in mind that Nvidia also paid some money for having their name all over the original aswell, and don't forget, SLi worked like a pile of turd for basically as long as xfire did despite being an "nvidia" title.
Also AMD should be pumping money into titles in the future, but remember that Crysis 2 will have been in the works from before Crysis was finished, and obviously it was already an Nvidia game at that point.
The thing is its more like a game of highest bidder wins in terms of game support. If Nvidia come along and say we'll give you $2mil to go exclusive to Nvidia and give us dedicated support, and we'll throw a couple dev's your way and we'll try and get a decent driver out at launch to be as optimised as possible, they failed miserably and SLI scaling was no better than xfire scaling, despite Nvidia having been involved for a couple of years they basically managed no better than AMD. Basically they paid 2mil to have their name associated with the title, but had very little input judging by their refusal to add dodgey physx to it.
AMD should be, largely because they are profitable now, able to spend more money on similar things though theres a fairly large amount of unused power on AMD hardware at any given time so theres more to be gained by dev support and optimising a game engine to make use of the more complex shader arrangement, Nvidia hardware is basically old school, its very easy to max out basically every shader on the card and get the full performance.
But that spending, if you went out TODAY and tied down 50 of the best games to be "AMD" games, most games coming out over the next two years will already be tied down, so extra spending and support can quite easily not show itself for years. The problem being that while they could send along driver guys to help get the best out of a game, if Nvidia have a contract that says they won't help AMD and thats how the game dev's get the money, then thats what will happen.
I personally think both Nvidia and AMD should pay teams of guys to help out game makers, but both should agree to no longer pay any game maker to "exclude" the other or be able to pay for specific features to be excluded.
If Nvidia hardware is really THAT much better at GPGPU then surely that speed will be maintained on opencl accerated physics so they obviously have nothing to fear do they
It just won't happen, I don't like the idea of AMD or Nvidia getting their claws into a game, its less about getting anything done better and seemingly more about sabotaging the other guys more. I dislike the whole practice and surely game makers, if they games were simply better and ran better on ALL hardware, gaming on PC's would be more attractive to more users, and they'd sell more games.
Nvidia have a HUGE issue in the next couple years though, lack of any presence in the console market when next gen machines are out, could mean a lotta AMD gpu's and a LOT of dev's working to optimise for AMD architecture to get the very best out of the consoles, if that happens almost every big game out in a year will be essentially AMD optimised.
