AMD: "[Developers use PhysX only] because they’re paid to do it"

Discussion in 'Graphics and Semiconductor Industry' started by Richard, Mar 9, 2010.

  1. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,489
    Likes Received:
    907
    If NVIDIA hadn't been involved, Rocksteady Studios probably would have implemented AA themselves and for everyone. It's a huge third-person AAA game, MSAA is almost a prerequisite.

    Would you feel the same way had AMD offered to implement DX 11 in, say, Stalker CoP, only to disable it on GeForces?
     
    #301 Alexko, Oct 19, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 19, 2010
  2. pcchen

    pcchen Moderator
    Moderator Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,741
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Taiwan
    To be honest, this means nothing. NVIDIA's dev relation also did a lot of improvements to a lot of games which were not limited to their own hardwares. So this is not a counter example for the issue at hand.

    My question is, how is that different from a normal exclusive deal? This is not even new in PC games, as there was some "enhanced version" specially designed only for a GPU (which was not sold, only bundled with the video cards).

    Of course, if the game does not make it clear that some functions are only supported on some GPUs then it can be a problem.
     
  3. Brad Grenz

    Brad Grenz Philosopher & Poet
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Oregon
    The answer is yes, AMD tried to provide a hardware agnostic MSAA solution and the publisher refused to implement it because of their contractual obligations to nVidia. The real problem is that publishers should not be making deals that render half their paying customers second class citizens in the userbase. It's anti-consumer and AMD has been very upfront about refusing to engage in tactics so hostile to the users.
     
  4. MDolenc

    Regular

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    425
    Location:
    Slovenia
    Then why didn't they implement this on their own? Why did NV folks need to come by saying "hey guys we can add MSAA to your game"?
    By the sound of it everything was done for the renderer and then NV came by saying "we'll buy AA feature for out cards" and Rocksteady said "OK" and the only reason the game even runs on AMD hardware is because NV didn't have enough cash to make the entire game exclusive...

    Well maybe it would be better if AMD would come out with an DX11 renderer for Stalker CoP and then NVIDIA would do their own DX11 renderer for Stalker CoP? If they implemented that much of DX 11 into the game that developer is willing to say "it's yours" then go for it.
     
  5. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,489
    Likes Received:
    907
    Or NVIDIA came and said "don't bother with AA, we'll do it for you, and throw marketing money in as well… just don't expect it to run on Radeons".

    Well, I think it would be best if developers wrote their own games and made sure they were compatible with both families of GPUs, but maybe that's just me.
    Help offered by IHVs should come with no strings attached, and that seems to be the case as far as AMD is concerned.
     
  6. Richard

    Richard Mord's imaginary friend
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,508
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    PT, EU
    100% agreed. For the good of the PC platform even. Not only do we have to put up with straight console ports that run at 300fps on a GeForce 8800 GT with blurry 720p videos, but when we do get something extra we have to make sure we're running the hardware that was favoured during development. I can deal with a small performance loss. Feature loss, when the competitor can handle it just as well is not really acceptable to me.

    Except with FarCry's AMD64 patch /me runs away screaming "never forget, never forgive!"
     
  7. Arnold Beckenbauer

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,409
    Likes Received:
    347
    Location:
    Germany
    I've played GoW with 2x/4xMSAA& my good old X1950GT Super. But it doesn't answer your question.
     
  8. CarstenS

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    4,796
    Likes Received:
    2,054
    Location:
    Germany
    The question already was answered a couple of posts later. It has to be a driver hack, because it isn't covered by DX9 spec.
     
  9. XMAN26

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    1
    Rather interesting Concidering the UE3 HAS NO AA SUPPORT writen into it and Nvidia had to WRITE the CODE for it. The Dev didn't use AMD SOFTWARE fix because it required the use of NVIDIA's HAND writen code and to play it safe, they told AMD to come up with their own code. AMD BALKED, Nvidia eventually told them(UBI) it was ok.
     
  10. trinibwoy

    trinibwoy Meh
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Messages:
    10,414
    Likes Received:
    411
    Location:
    New York
    Sure, if you believe in far fetched conspiracy theories. MDolenc's scenario is the most plausible.
     
  11. Sontin

    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    AMD is complaining that nVidia is using one of their DX11 games to promote their own cards?! So why is AMD not doing the same thing? Show us a little bit of the future, AMD.
    Or must be wait for the year 2012 to see the next game with tessellation in which development amd is involve?
     
  12. Brad Grenz

    Brad Grenz Philosopher & Poet
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,531
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Oregon
    How to add AA to a UE3 game is well known now. nVidia or AMD can probably cut and paste a solution into an email for any dev who wants it within a day. AMD tried to provide code for Batman but WBI's lawyers said any modification of the existing code exposed the company to possible litigation from nVidia (because of the contract/copywrite). nVidia never said it was OK. It took a separate SKU (the game of the year edition) which is a distinct product from a legal standpoint before the change could be implemented. To pretend AMD were the bad guys in this situation is a pure fantasy.
     
  13. Sontin

    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2009
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    And btw: AMD should stop talking about using open source apis, when they have a problem with dx11 and tessellation.

    Right: They didn't send anything to Rocksteady at the time they complained about the situation.
    It's clear in the e-mails that they wanted to use the same code.
     
  14. eastmen

    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    9,975
    Likes Received:
    1,491
    http://hardocp.com/news/2010/10/20/benchmark_wars

    hardocp is all over the place. They don't mind comparing super overclocked cards to stock cards, but they like ot think they are special with their benchmarking.

    But this is just another fun thing that nvidia has done like removing the dx 10.1 path from creed 2
     
  15. 3dcgi

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,432
    Likes Received:
    261
    I'm not sure what DX11 has to do with an open source API as it most certainly is not. AMD doesn't have a problem with dx11 and tessellation. AMD is trying to promote levels of tessellation that work best with current quad based rasterization hardware.

    I wish game developers would include the ability to control tessellation via graphics options. Then users can choose for themselves what works best. Also, a piece of trivia many of you might not know that Xenos' max tessellation level is 16.
     
  16. XMAN26

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    1
    Actually, Nvidia did say and was revieled thru emails that they (UbiSoft) could reuse the code some 2-3m after the whole thing started. AMD on the other hand waited til long after its release to offer any kind of help or solution which is why the fix didn't show until the GotY SKU came out. AMD just sucks on DevRel, face it.
     
  17. fbuffer

    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    half truths again ... ? or just selective memory ?
     
  18. Dave Baumann

    Dave Baumann Gamerscore Wh...
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2002
    Messages:
    14,079
    Likes Received:
    648
    Location:
    O Canada!
    We were active prior to the games release in order to get AA in the game.
     
  19. Malo

    Malo Yak Mechanicum
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Messages:
    6,952
    Likes Received:
    3,032
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Don't bother Dave. Nothing you or anyone could say would do anything to sway the minds of certain individuals.
     
  20. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    15,944
    Likes Received:
    4,897
    We'll never know, because by the time AMD submitted their in game AA workaround after finally getting a final build from them (which they had to fight tooth and nail to get while it was provided regularly to Nvidia), Nvidia had already legally blocked it from being used.

    And just to be clear I don't hold the developers or publishers of Batman: AA blameless in this either. I'm never ever buying another Rocksteady game. So in this case, I'm actually laying less blame on Nvidia for doing this than I am for Rocksteady allowing them to do this and going along with it.

    Regards,
    SB
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...