PCGH asks Nvidia on Gameworks

tommybhoy · 1 Jul 2014 at 14:16

Bottom line rusty, dev co-operation and willing to help address problems with your non sponsered ihv is what ALL the threads are about, the rest is semantic arguments/merry go round and round and round.

I know how PR works, they all lie one way or another in amongst the spin layte.

humbug · 1 Jul 2014 at 14:16

oldestgregg said:
On the topic of HBAO+ though is HDAO (the other one to HBAO that starts with H) not exclusive to AMD?

I thought HBAO/+ was Nvidia while SSAO and HDAO was AMD?

All three run on AMD, does HDAO not run on Nvidia?

Silent_Scone · 1 Jul 2014 at 14:18

A lie is a lie

Rusty0611 · 1 Jul 2014 at 14:20

tommybhoy said:
Bottom line rusty, dev co-operation and willing to help address problems with your non sponsered ihv is what ALL the threads are about, the rest is semantic arguments/merry go round and round and round.

I know how PR works, they all lie one way or another in amongst the spin layte.

Nobody has an issue with that statement, Tommy, but that isn't the same as the point you were trying to make earlier and signals a moving of the goalposts.

You were originally trying to show a 'white lie' which the nVidia dude has allegedly told... but what he has stated isn't contradicted by the earlier statement from the other nVidia guy. So you were incorrect in your assumption.

layte said:
Asking for code changes is how this works. Requiring access to source is not. Developers may work with OEM's but to think that requiring access to source code to be able to suggest fixes and optimisations is how this works is wrong.

Accept that Huddy lied. Trying to shift people's focus to Nvidia by trying to twist what somebody actually said into what you think they said is pretty sad. If the honour of your favourite hardware vendor really means that much perhaps you should take a step back and really decide if it's worth it old chap.

+1

LtMatt · 1 Jul 2014 at 20:33

The Tomb Raider contract will be in a journalists hands soon, will be interesting to see if they have any clauses in there that harm Nvidia.

https://twitter.com/x/status/484052825945952257

Martini1991 · 1 Jul 2014 at 20:36

How do we know this is the contract that was in place at Tomb Raiders launch, rather than an amended contract that makes them look like they're Gods?

layte · 1 Jul 2014 at 20:42

Aye. Gonna be hard to believe anything AMD PR has to say for a while. No doubt if the contract did have any smoking guns, they will be 'mistakenly' left out.

Edit: The tweet indicates it is a generic contract. No specific mention of Tomb Raider.

LtMatt · 1 Jul 2014 at 20:42

Martini1991 said:
How do we know this is the contract that was in place at Tomb Raiders launch, rather than an amended contract that makes them look like they're Gods?

I expect we'll be able to get some confirmation from the Game Dev or the publisher, if needed.

Orangey · 1 Jul 2014 at 20:42

Jason @ Forbes ‏@killyourfm 1m

@TheMattB81 @amd @nvidia I'm not aware which contract yet.

Martini1991 · 1 Jul 2014 at 20:44

LtMatt said:
I expect we'll be able to get some confirmation from the Game Dev or the publisher, if needed.

My expectation is more that we'll see an amended contract (Or just a contract for such things, rather than the contract from Tomb Raiders launch which somewhat invalidates the "significance" of this contract reveal) that paints AMD in the best light, and people will lap it up and use it to again (unjustly) chastise Nvidia.

Tonester0011 · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:00

Gave up reading on page 5, hurting my face.
Wonder how many of you have bed sheets with their favourite GPU manufacturer on it?

LtMatt · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:17

Martini1991 said:
My expectation is more that we'll see an amended contract (Or just a contract for such things, rather than the contract from Tomb Raiders launch which somewhat invalidates the "significance" of this contract reveal) that paints AMD in the best light, and people will lap it up and use it to again (unjustly) chastise Nvidia.

My expectation is you'll be wrong.

Tonester0011 said:
Gave up reading on page 5, hurting my face.
Wonder how many of you have bed sheets with their favourite GPU manufacturer on it?

Do AMD endorsed nipple clamps count?

Gerard · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:20

So first it was "they'll never release the contract, there's no chance of something like that going public". Now that its a reality the song and dance has changed to "Omg it'll be an amended version of the contract not the legit one".

This subsection really is the place that keeps on giving..

Martini1991 · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:25

Gerard said:
So first it was "they'll never release the contract, there's no chance of something like that going public". Now that its a reality the song and dance has changed to "Omg it'll be an amended version of the contract not the legit one".

This subsection really is the place that keeps on giving..

I don't think I've said anything about the contract, but your quote isn't an example of a sidestep/goal changing, it's the same thing really, an amended or not the right contract is exactly the same as "the contract not going public" (Because if it's not that contract, then it hasn't gone public)
Not that I actually trust AMD regardless of what they show, because they (like Nvidia) tend to do some shady stuff, and outright lie.

Martini1991 · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:27

LtMatt said:
My expectation is you'll be wrong.

We'll just say I'm wrong, because I don't trust anything AMD post

LtMatt · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:29

Martini1991 said:
We'll just say I'm wrong, because I don't trust anything AMD post

Lol what i meant was i think you'll be wrong about the part where they modify the contract.

Orangey · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:29

Plenty of vulcans

on here said it wouldn't happen at all and that based Huddy knew that but was point-scoring.

Martini1991 · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:33

LtMatt said:
Lol what i meant was i think you'll be wrong about the part where they modify the contract.

How would we know though? Unless they post the contract that was in place at the time of launch, then it's irrelevant really? And I don't trust AMD to do that anyway, they have no problem with publicly lying.

I don't think they'll "modify" the contract as such.

layte · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:35

Orangey said:
Plenty of vulcans on here said it wouldn't happen at all and that based Huddy knew that but was point-scoring.

The problem is given recent events, it is hard to believe that AMD PR is telling the truth, they have already been caught out in one lie.

Not that it has been confirmed that this is the original TR contract, it could be a generic contract without any specific vendor clauses. AMD have a crisis of reliability surrounding their PR department right now.

Edit: I'm not sure how AMD can actually come out of this without digging the hole they are in any deeper. Surely the best thing to do right now is to quietly drop the whole thing and wait for this storm to blow over. The problem is right now, neither camp will believe anything the other has to say.

Gerard · 1 Jul 2014 at 21:36

layte said:
The problem is given recent events, it is hard to believe that AMD PR is telling the truth, they have already been caught out in one lie.

Not that it has been confirmed that this is the original TR contract, it could be a generic contract without any specific vendor clauses. AMD have a crisis of reliability surrounding their PR department right now.

It was a "lie" yet it was Huddy himself that corrected his statement? More like he got his facts wrong, but to be overly dramatic its a lie apparently.