Devs Speak on PS3.0

HaHa thats a good one Princess Frosty commenting on trolling :oops: , I remember you from HardOCP when I used to go there and thats all you ever did, all for the holy grail of Nvidia, I could go there and pull out hundreds of ripe Fan type quotes and trolling statements and have fun doing so. :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: .

I dare you too make me :devilish: .

Back on topic: I personally think there will be no REAL advantage for Nvidia during this generation as there will be No games that make FULL use of PS3.0 so its really a mute point as there is a possibility R500 will be out by the end of the year, making the R420 line drop to real bargain prices.
 
Princess_Frosty said:
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.

yup take the high road just because you really can't prove anything if anybody challenges your own thoughts
 
Princess_Frosty said:
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.

Your assumption about me trolling is so far from the truth, the fact that I'm enjoying myself is simply stateing a fact that I'm enjoying the back and forth and your obviously lack of experience in how this business and the effects on consumer actually affects it.

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.

If your not open minded enough to look at my perspective on things as holding logic as it pertains to the current business practice's of said companies, then hold on to your truth, because one day you will understand if you ever become experienced in the different facets of how a business is actually run. This will enlighten you a lot more than I ever could.
 
The fact is that SM3.0 does the same thing as SM2.0 except that there are no restrictions on the shader instructions.

With that being said, 3.0 is the logical progression and of course will be a mainstay in the next few years until we get the next shader set. I mean how can you argue against 3.0 when it provides developers with what us gamers are looking for. We want better games, with better performance, with stunning IQ, the way the developers had coded it for. Not for any developer or IHV to have to alter settings/paths to provide playable games.

The biggest thing here, has already been said 69 times. We need the hardware before the developers can take advantage of it. Whether it was ATI or NVIDIA implementing Sm3.0 first, doesn't matter. I am glad someone did.
 
AntShaw said:
The biggest thing here, has already been said 69 times. We need the hardware before the developers can take advantage of it. Whether it was ATI or NVIDIA implementing Sm3.0 first, doesn't matter. I am glad someone did.

So am I.

Doesn't mean SM 3.0 support is a good selling point for consumers with this generation of products.

Again, a lot of the back and forth on this issue is due to looking at the situation from different perspecitves: consumer vs. developer.
 
Princess_Frosty said:
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.

Hmm, thats just dev support. Let me give you an overview of GITG and TWIMTBP:

IHV: so I have money, lots of money.
DEV: I'm poor, it costs a lot of money to bring out a game and the enviroment is risky.
IHV: If you become my love slave, I will pay you.
DEV: Doesn't seem so bad. What do I have to do.
IHV: whatever I tell you. Mostly just make me happy, by making me look better.
DEV: well, I do need the money.

Sure, its the crass version but its a lot closer to the truth than this, lets partner to help the consumer BS.

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

Reality and Facts do not support your argument.


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.

So I guess it was my imagination that nVidia had convinced EA to do vendor detection and only turn of certain special effect features if it was an nvidia card..

And I'm sure that the people who buy an NV6800 are going to be happy playing in PS1.1 mode with far cry and other games which are doing vendor detection of render paths.



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.

Actually they provide optimization and hardware expertise to developers regardless of if they are in the love slave programs. You see, they dev support and the love slave programs have NOTHING to do with each other. This is born out by fact and example within the industry.


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.

1. You have yet to articulate 1 way in which these programs benefit end users. You keep mentioning dev support, but developers get dev support regardless of whether or not they are in these programs, so it obviously isn't dev support.

2. There is no proof or evidence that TWIMTBP or GITG produce less buggy games on the respective hardware.

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.

Oh, only if this was true and this was the case. But sadly it isn't and is not where the problem lies.

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.

Artificially segmenting a small but innovative part of the entertainment market for there personal gain at the expense of the consumer. Putting in vendor detection into games that prevents future products from using features that they are capable of using. Using proprietary extentions/interfaces when public extentions/interfaces are available that will do the exact same thing. Lying about it to the consumer. Having features which competitor cards are perfectly capable of running disabled if a competitor's card is detected. Doing Vendor ID detection and only running the game if said vendor ID is detected. Preventing consumers with competitor's cards from running the game.

TWIMTBP and GITG are the bastard children of satan that at best have zero benefit for consumers, and at worst cause irrepairable harm.
 
i remember Princess Frosty from [H] forums as well... only one of the most unabashed trolls there...

fanboys are funny.
 
This:
aaronspink said:
IHV: so I have money, lots of money.
DEV: I'm poor, it costs a lot of money to bring out a game and the enviroment is risky.
and this:
So I guess it was my imagination that nVidia had convinced EA to do vendor detection and only turn of certain special effect features if it was an nvidia card..
just don't fit, at least with scenario you depicted.
I don't think EA (or just to make another name: Epic Games) needs nVidia (or ATI) moneys at all, but I could be wrong..

Maybe you're right, but never the facts are so black or white like you're telling us there.
 
IHV: so I have money, lots of money.
DEV: I'm poor, it costs a lot of money to bring out a game and the enviroment is risky.
IHV: If you become my love slave, I will pay you.
DEV: Doesn't seem so bad. What do I have to do.
IHV: whatever I tell you. Mostly just make me happy, by making me look better.
DEV: well, I do need the money.

I don't think Carmack, Sweeney, etc. are poor.
 
I was going to write up this big long post about developer and IHV relationships. Then I realised. No one cares, People have formed their opinions. And It'd be a waiste of breath.

Personally I'm glad ATI and Nvidia are working with devs the way they are. But I dont believe these programs are just about IHVs bribing Devs.
 
AntShaw said:
The biggest thing here, has already been said 69 times. We need the hardware before the developers can take advantage of it.

Have you asked how many developers have really pushed the limitations of 2.0 yet?
 
Oh my, this kinda got off topic a bit.

I can see the advantages and disadvantages to the developer relations programs that both ATI and NVIDIA have. Yes, probably quite a bit of pressure is put on these developers from the IHV's, and that is unfortunate. It is business though, so all that we users can do is shrug.

That being said, I have heard of a lot of positive aspects that come from these alliances and deals. One quick one off the top of my head was that NVIDIA gave Bathesda a lot of help with the shader effects in Morrowind. Apparently not many of the coders from Bathesda had any real knowledge about shaders, and the net immerse engine supported them (kinda). So, NVIDIA gave them a lot of help to add these features to the engine. ATI has done the same thing with some of their partners, and these optimizations have usually not been specific to any particular card (just good, solid code that runs as it should).

Politics suck, as they always do, but say I am a new developer with a very small group of programmers that are working more on content and getting the basic engine running, and I have no time or money to get another programmer to work on the more advanced features that I was hoping to put into the game. I would have the ability to contact either ATI and NVIDIA and probably get some help here. It is in both NVIDIA's and ATI's interest to support as many developers as they can, because the more advanced content out there will mean more high end card sales to run it.

Yes, there are bits of nastiness in there, but I think overall that the good outweighs the bad. Do you really think that Far Cry would look nearly as good as it does on ATI's cards if Crytek had not had the extensive PS 2.0 programming help from NVIDIA? Last I saw, Far Cry was a TWIMTBP game, and it looks far better on ATI hardware than it does on current NVIDIA hardware.
 
That being said, I have heard of a lot of positive aspects that come from these alliances and deals. One quick one off the top of my head was that NVIDIA gave Bathesda a lot of help with the shader effects in Morrowind.

Josh, I think Aarons point is that this is what the dev rel of both IHV's do in the first place, even before any marketting campaigns. And, if you think about it, its in their best interests to do this anyway since the more they can get advanced features in new games (either from the developers themselves doing it or the IHV's dev rel giving a lot of assistance) then the more the performance is drawn down on older boards and the more the upgrade cycle is spurned on.

IIRC unfortunatly, the particular example you cite I think used NVIDIA vendor specific opengl instructions.

The problem comes in when vendors attempt to push the concpet of a "platform" which just should not happen in the PC space.
 
JoshMST said:
I can see the advantages and disadvantages to the developer relations programs that both ATI and NVIDIA have. Yes, probably quite a bit of pressure is put on these developers from the IHV's, and that is unfortunate. It is business though, so all that we users can do is shrug.

There is no advantage to trying to segment the PC gaming industry. What do you think the DX API was formed for, to prevent these things from happening.
A developer should be working for 'us' the consumer, not a single graphic card company. ANY IHV has Dev relations, the cash cow is all these developers are looking for.
 
DaveBaumann said:
That being said, I have heard of a lot of positive aspects that come from these alliances and deals. One quick one off the top of my head was that NVIDIA gave Bathesda a lot of help with the shader effects in Morrowind.

Josh, I think Aarons point is that this is what the dev rel of both IHV's do in the first place, even before any marketting campaigns. And, if you think about it, its in their best interests to do this anyway since the more they can get advanced features in new games (either from the developers themselves doing it or the IHV's dev rel giving a lot of assistance) then the more the performance is drawn down on older boards and the more the upgrade cycle is spurned on.

IIRC unfortunatly, the particular example you cite I think used NVIDIA vendor specific opengl instructions.

The problem comes in when vendors attempt to push the concpet of a "platform" which just should not happen in the PC space.

I didnt realise Morrowind was OpenGL. learn somethen new everyday ^^
 
I forget which it was. There was one of those types of games around that era that had this a specific issue with extensions. It might be NWN.
 
DaveBaumann said:
I forget which it was. There was one of those types of games around that era that had this a specific issue with extensions. It might be NWN.

Yes Neverwinter Nights was the one which used Shader extensions for Nvidia GPUS, I still remember the beta patch on my 8500 Where the Shaders were working. But there was some issue with the water and little glitches in rendering. Considering at the time of NWN release (they were using OpenGL 1.3) there werent any ways to enable Shaders other than IHV extensions AFAIK. Bioware continously blamed ATI for issues with the shaders and water, (something to do with OpenGL extensions) whether or not this had to do with ATI support NV_extensions or not, I dont think anyone but Bioware/ATI know for sure.


That being said. This game is still buggy on my 8500 With Anistropic Filtering.


But I was pretty sure Morrowind is DirectX...
 
Back
Top