Devs Speak on PS3.0

[AntShaw]

From my understanding from reading everyones posts, (and personally,) with next gen cards were are hoping for superior IQ with above average performance.

From all the dribble I have been reading through all the threads is that regardless of anything SM3.0 will allow the developers to program the shaders as they want, as long as they want.

With that being said, is that not what we are all looking for? For our next gen hardware to display IQ as the way the developers code for? With SM2.0 and prior there are all limitations.

SM3.0 lifts these limitations and allows the developer to code and execute shaders as they please.

This is only a good thing and by far, there is no negative. Especially if the fact that SM3.0 can execute as fast or if not faster than SM2.0.

 

[bloodbob]

From all the dribble I have been reading through all the threads is that regardless of anything SM3.0 will allow the developers to program the shaders as they want, as long as they want.

1. There aren't these limitations in PS3.0 Great I'm gonna go out and do GI in real time tomorrow ( not ).
2. Some of these developers stood by and watched while nvidia deliberately altered the way the games looked so that nvidia would get more fps.

Yes PS3.0 is good but not everything said by the developers here is good.

 

[AntShaw]

2. Some of these developers stood by and watched while nvidia deliberately altered the way the games looked so that nvidia would get more fps.

Yes PS3.0 is good but not everything said by the developers here is good.

Right which is why I was saying that hopefully with the IHV support of SM3.0 it will allow the developers/programmers to code the shaders to perform on 'X' hardware the way they code, instead of the shaders to perform on 'X' hardware as the IHV decides for them to be executed.

 

[Princess_Frosty]

Some of the things i've been reading here are totaly rediculus...

Look its simple, this is the next step in the evolutions of video graphics, new features which DO add new benefits which can't be had with previous hardware. This is straight up fact, no matter how you put a spin on it its true.

This is more or less the exact same thing as last year with PS2.0, everyone debated wether it would be usefull or not and obviously it was at some point before the next round of shaders and hardware to support them.

The simple fact is you need to have the hardware there before game developers will even start to think about supporting them in their games.

As far as i've seen theres no benchmarks worth anything out for the new radeon set of video cards yet (R420) so any comments about it running PS2.0 faster than the new FX 6800 range are also not worth anything. As we've heard from several of the game developers theres some PS2.0 instructions which will run more efficiently with PS3.0, not only that but they can be written more efficiently from the ground up.

Of course you're going to hear a lot of opinions and ATI not supporting these new features are going to constantly downplay their usefullness. This brings about the questions whens DX9.c going to arrive to let us utilise these new shaders, who knows, but i'd be willing to bet its BEFORE the next round of cards in which ATI should then be offering PS3.0.

The problem came from ATI meeting minamum requirements for the time which paid off, gave them better performance as running at 24 bit was a life saver, and gave them the edge for PS2.0. However the time will come when they will HAVE to run at 32bit, and IF they want to stay competative they will need to support multiple precision modes, otherwise the frame rates will be abismal. All this stuff that Nvidia have been doing, the multiple precision that a LOT of people frowned upon, ATI will also have to do. I'm not saying however that Nvidia handled it in an acceptable way thats down to your own judgement.

The simple fact remains, as long as ATI dont support PS3.0 in their next gen hardware (so far all evidence says no) then you will NEED to get Nvidia hardware.

Any ATI fans out there who are trying to downplay shader 3.0 i'd had to say be carefull how you argue this, its almost the same thing as 2.0 last year, DX9.c isnt out yet, we know you'll bring this up, but DX9 wasn't out when the Radeons hit the shelfs. Theres already been an identifyable list of games which plan to use the new shaders in the not so distant future and i find it HIGHLY unlikly that there will be no use for them untill the next hardware cycle. No one can yet argue the performance of these new cards at PS2.0 code we dont know enough abotu them to make a comparison, im certainly not ruleing out the possibility that Nvidia will not only deliver 3.0 capability but offer competative 2.0 shader speeds also.

I'd also like to say that looking down upon programs such as TWIMTBP is very sad, these programs are around to help game developers utilise the hardware such that they get the best performance and most compatablity out of our games.

Yes before anyone says, im a bit of an Nvidia fa|\|boy, i've not owned a ATI card so far and NO im not unhappy with my current hardware, no matter how many of you believe you know better than me. I try not to let this fact influence my perspective, but i have to say its really very annoying that some ATI fanboys are trying to downplay the use of shaders 3.0 just because the next gen ATI hardware wont support it, when the exact opposite argument was used to try and buff the radeon range of cards not a year ago.

I'll try and stick to the facts for now, see what happens when we get benchmarks out from the new ATI card, we may be pleasantly supprised with awesome PS2.0 speeds maybe even beating Nvidias range, however as a personal preference i don't pay for a top end card which i can't use for games to be released soon. That imense speed im buying needs to be put to some good use, as was said by a game dev in the article, if one card runs quake at 170FPS and the other card runs it at 180FPS its really irrelevent, and more features is enough to sway the preference. At the end of the day its personal preference and people buy the hardware to suit their own needs, some people don't even give a damn about shaders.

 

[anaqer]

I just thinking with flow control, shaders become closer to other programming languages like say C.

Well, perhaps the high level inplementations of PS3.0. But convenience for the shader programmer - while increasingly important - is an entirely different matter then end-user benefit. People won't buy PS3.0 capable parts to ease the stress on devs, they buy it for speed and/or better visuals. And that's the main point : can flow control bring so much to the table for the end-user as marketed?

 

[anaqer]

The simple fact remains, as long as ATI dont support PS3.0 in their next gen hardware (so far all evidence says no) then you will NEED to get Nvidia hardware.

Instant classic.

 

[Princess_Frosty]

I should probably change that to...

"The simple fact remains, as long as ATI dont support PS3.0 in their next gen hardware (so far all evidence says no) then you will NEED to get Nvidia hardware to use these features"

before i get torn to shreds

 

[anaqer]

That's much better, except for.... Series 5 ! ! ! 8)

 

[Evildeus]

Hmmm Series 5, i will aknowledge that when i will see it.

On the other hand, i thought VS 3.0 was the biggest step in SM3.0 :?

 

[ANova]

I'd also like to say that looking down upon programs such as TWIMTBP is very sad, these programs are around to help game developers utilise the hardware such that they get the best performance and most compatablity out of our games.

Come on now. It's one thing to have a program thats aimed at helping devs with their creations and ensuring compatibility and another thing entirely to require them to include an nvidia marketing logo in exchange for that service which is blatantly aimed at misleading the average unknowing consumer into believing the product will only run well on nvidia class hardware.

As for PS3.0. nvidia is trying to play it up, we're not trying to play it down. The simple fact is it offers no new visual capabilities over 2.0. It's only advantages are increases in efficiency and structuring which allows developers to do more easier. Obviously it is a step up from 2.0, but I wouldn't call it a significant difference.

 

[PatrickL]

If TWIMTBP program was to help developpers, they would get all the money or most of instead of that money going to editors.

 

[Princess_Frosty]

Its the job of Nvidia and ATI to play up their features, and to be perfectly honest i wouldn't say its been "boasted" about anymore than anything else.

Asking a company to display the Nvidia logo on startup of the game is hardly anything to complain about, if you're about to start complaining about these kinda things then its just clutching at straws.

TWIMTBP isn't ment to help developers directly, its ment to be beneficial to the end user, no one knows more about the video hardware than the people who make it, the game developers and the hardware developers working closly together only makes sense, and at the end of the day it works, no matter how much you want to, you can't put a bad spin on something like this.

 

[aaronspink]

TWIMTBP isn't ment to help developers directly, its ment to be beneficial to the end user, no one knows more about the video hardware than the people who make it, the game developers and the hardware developers working closly together only makes sense, and at the end of the day it works, no matter how much you want to, you can't put a bad spin on something like this.

1. Explain how TWIMTBP has been a benefit to end users.

2. Explain what TWIMTBP and GITG have anything to do with dev support.

3. Explain how TWIMTBP "works" and what its goals are.

4. Explain why you can't put a bad spin on a marketing relationship, which results in specific features being disabled on specific hardware when that specific hardware is the most capable of using that specific features. Exta Credit: explain how this benefits end users.

5. Explain how disabling performance testing in a game developed by a TWIMTBP affiliate where said performance testing showed that nvidia was non-competitive performance wise, benefits end users.

I can come up with a LOT of example where TWIMTBP has NOT benefitted end users, and has in fact harmed end users. I know of NO CASE where TWIMTBP has benefitted end users ( and no, dev support doesn't count as it is both nVidia's and ATI's responsibility/benefit to support development and education. AMD and Intel support a hell of a lot more developers than ATI and nVidia combined and neither of them need some fancy money changing hands co-marketting campaign to do it).

Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.

 

[nAo]

pfff..boring

 

[Princess_Frosty]

As far as i understand the programs help the game developers develop their video engines so that they communicate with the drivers better, this helps them create the same visual effects with better performance, fine tune video graphics so game specific optimisations can be made and help elimiate any visual bugs BEFORE the game is released, rather than afterwards.

The end users benefits from this because while usualy these sorts of things get sorted out, its not usualy untill a patch afterwards.

Since the game devs work along side the hardware devs nothing gets disabled feature wise which isnt considerd a good decision between both of them. If either companys tried to force these restrictions you'd know about it as the game devs would speak up about it.

( and no, dev support doesn't count as it is both nVidia's and ATI's responsibility/benefit to support development and education. AMD and Intel support a hell of a lot more developers than ATI and nVidia combined and neither of them need some fancy money changing hands co-marketting campaign to do it).

Nvidia and ATI make the hardware and yes they have a responsability to provide education on how to use it, however that doesn't mean they HAVE to, its not some law they have to abide by. They are providing support in areas where they don't nesiceirly have to, and thats benefiting the end users.

Theres plenty of ways that these programs benefit the end users, at the end of the day Nvidia and ATI are companies, they make money thats their job, this support is there to ensure their customers get the best use out of their hardware. At the end of the day if im getting a game which is MORE bug free and runs better on my hardware beacuse the devs have worked together then its a bonus.

Im not going to faff about moaning that a certain feature has been disabled which is probably something i can't use anyways because the frame rates would be really bad.

Maybe you should enlighten me as to how these evil coperations are deliberatly harming the people that buy their products. Sounds to me like you're just sore about something.

 

[Atomahawk]

Asking a company to display the Nvidia logo on startup of the game is hardly anything to complain about, if you're about to start complaining about these kinda things then its just clutching at straws.

Clutching for straws, I don't think so, what developers said read directly as a who gets paid by who response from them in that interview. If you don't see it that way fine. Most do. No one is argueing that PS 3.0 isn't a step forward, the problem is you get a response that directly correlates in importance to who gets paid by who and that's the problem.

TWIMTBP isn't ment to help developers directly, its ment to be beneficial to the end user, no one knows more about the video hardware than the people who make it, the game developers and the hardware developers working closly together only makes sense, and at the end of the day it works, no matter how much you want to, you can't put a bad spin on something like this.

How do's that spinning logo or any advertising on a game that is supported finacialy from either graphic company benefit the consumer? Give me 1 example that actually gives me the benefits of these programs.

TWIMTBP isn't ment to help developers directly

No ? who gets paid for putting that logo there? The 2 reasons these programs are their are simply to pay the developers for the space allocated thus a finacial gain, and the other is to directly influance consumer purchaseing trends, that's it that's all! If you don't understand how bad that is for consumers in the long run and often in short term, well I'm not going to draw the big picture for you.

This is off topic anyway so you don't need to repley.

 

[Princess_Frosty]

Yes it is of topic and so i will finish by saying this.

The logo showing at the start is only part of the agreement between the game developers and the hardware developers. You cannot base your opinions on these programs soley on one tiny aspect.

Besides advertisement is advertisment, its an agreement between 2 companys which both decide on the outcome together (and agreement between them) Again the game devs decide what goes in their game, its not your choice...

 

[Atomahawk]

As far as i understand the programs help the game developers develop their video engines so that they communicate with the drivers better, this helps them create the same visual effects with better performance, fine tune video graphics so game specific optimisations can be made and help elimiate any visual bugs BEFORE the game is released, rather than afterwards.

OH really! Here's a very recent example of how the developers were helped useing your own logic, too iron out bugs so to speak. Now come back and tell us how the finacial gains recieved from X company benefited a bug free gameing experience. Just do a search at this forum for lets say 5900 and read all of the problems. Then come back to tell us that your opinion still holds true http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/6/ubb.x?a=frm&s=400102&f=452106891

Since the game devs work along side the hardware devs nothing gets disabled feature wise which isnt considerd a good decision between both of them. If either companys tried to force these restrictions you'd know about it as the game devs would speak up about it.

You think the developer that gets payed by company X will say something if there's an issue with the drivers that force brilinear as opposed to trilinear, and this publicly? LOL, that is too funny, sorry, but you lack some serious business experience if you think that's going to happen.

Nvidia and ATI make the hardware and yes they have a responsability to provide education on how to use it, however that doesn't mean they HAVE to, its not some law they have to abide by. They are providing support in areas where they don't nesiceirly have to, and thats benefiting the end users.

Wrong again, Yes they (hardware maker) have too support the developer with technical issue's involving their hardware especially when the developer has specific problems relateing to the hardware. If it dosn't work on the hardware it won't sell now will it, no sales no game, no game no hardware sales right! And since drivers are what cause's the most problems with games (so it seems) the hardware maker better help out the developer.

Im not going to faff about moaning that a certain feature has been disabled which is probably something i can't use anyways because the frame rates would be really bad.

Spoken like a true Nvidia supporter! Got far Cry running at 100 fps with everything maxed do ya, LOL.

Maybe you should enlighten me as to how these evil coperations are deliberatly harming the people that buy their products. Sounds to me like you're just sore about something.

You don't need to be enlightened, you just need some real life experience, maybe 5 more years and you'll get a better understaing as to how the hardware game is really played.

Sorry but I am haveing to much fun with you to leave it alone Even though it's off topic.

 

[Lezmaka]

Is it possible that 3.0 could indirectly lead to better quality? As in, the performance was increased enough that the devs were able to add more effects and keep performance similar?

 

[Princess_Frosty]

You sound like you're posting to entertain yourself, it seems by partly enticing me into some argument. Thats trolling and im not going to get baited, i'd like to keep things civil on this board.

I'd also like to say that throughout everything you put, most of what i said still stands to be true, if you need it explaining then you're not likly to understand the works of the situation.

Either way i wont comment on this subject anymore.