In response to recent events

[Hellbinder]

In fact, in my humble opinion, you and Kristof were and are plaing wrong on all the T&L usefulness debate. That doesn't mean this view of mine is the only truth and that all the other people have to perceive things as I do or otherwise they are all wrong.

Actually I have had some pretty interesting discussions with Derek Smart on the T&L issue. I happen to fully agree with him now (which i did not at first). Games that push the envelope in areas that Tax the CPU in other Areas like say...AI *Need* T&L to help balance the load. His game BCM performes on an order of magnitude better on T&L hardware than non T&L. Of Course his dynamic universe is crunching thousands upon thousands of lines of AI code perpetually.

Erm... Dont know what made me go so far off topic there...

Sorry...

 

[pascal]

The usefullness of T&L at that time was to help create the installed base for something that maybe now with UT2003/U2/Doom3 we will start to see. Then IMHO it was good for the gaming community in the long term (+2years) but was not usefull for the gamer in the short term. The usefullness then depends on the viewpoint.

 

[Riptides]

Alot of great points have already been made by previous posters mainly doing with what ben was along the lines of.

And with 3dfx - B3d lost its mainline into the 3d graphics industry, so they lose their one good source for exclusive content, and when one vendor is friendly and open, and the other is closed and demanding, its hard to not have some BIAS in your content, but it was at an acceptable level, but since the demise of 3dfx the content on this site nearly ground to a halt.

As a result I think all the content of this site has ended up exclusively here in forums. For a time this has worked well, but as more people post and the noise increases, it gets hard to sift thru it all just to get to reading something interesting.

I don't even mind reading some of the posts that go into immense *vaporish* detail on yet to be released cards, or the posts with secret *tech* someone just got off someone, who knows someone with the info NOT under NDA. But its when those posts get saturated with noise that it gets to be tedious to read and the content gets buried or ignored.
See - nearly all of you that post in here be droppin some major knowledge, but it gets tuned out in favor of oneupmanship constantly.
I can't blame the guys who run B3d for this, but i surely can see where some of you with high post counts need to sit back and realize that how you post or react to a post can also reflect on how others percieve this website/communtiy as a whole.

But what i can hold B3d responsible for is the lack of content and direction this site has had for the past 2 years. I am not totally coming down on you guys, i have seen effort. But some serious thought needs to be put into where this place is going and what needs to be done at this point.
Maybe get some people in the community to help put together articles. As there are alot of you who know more than you honestly should about 3d hardware and software, why not get your words archived in articles instead of buried in the forums constantly.

Just some lurker thoughts.
Now that i gave everyone a lil burnin, its only fair

 

[Dave Baumann]

Since your taking over we have already seen your broader scope in terms of paying attention to the players who aren't one of the big two at the time in 3D. It is nice to see 3DLabs/Integraph and Matrox at least paid some attention to here, along with actual reviews of ATi based products. I'm not saying that you haven't done anything, just the site has a somewhat generic feel to it right now.

This relates back to one of SA’s posts and how, as development progresses, the high end is gradually merging more and more with the consumer end – ultimately we will have to cover it because that’s the way of the industry; we either evolve with it or get left behind – considering this is supposed to be Beyond3D I figure its better to evolve. I was quite lucky with the whole 3Dlabs/P10 thing since this gives us a glimpse of the type of things they will be doing in the consumer space eventually. Also, I’ve always thought that this place gets a little pumped by the actual 3D tech and not just the products, so technology from some of the smaller vendors is just as important, IMO, if it has some interesting tech (again, this goes quite a lot towards P10 because there are some interesting new concepts there).

In terms of the hardware we cover though it can actually be a little confusing what our remit is and we need to send out a clear message to vendors in what we actually look at. To this end, obviously 3D cards from all ends of the spectrum is key, but so to should the elements that affect them be looked at – the CPU experimental review went quite well and I’ hoping to keep them up as CPU’s are equally important in shuttling the necessary data around to feed the 3D cards.

If you seperated it from the Wildcat it would

That was much of the point of the article – to look at a form of AA that’s beyond the scope of current consumer boards to see one avenue in which they could be going for in the future as higher level and more programmable AA is coming about.

Bullshit Dave. I agree that you understand the importance, and I think getting K to pump out some new content is a very good thing, but if you honestly think you can't write the same types of articles you are selling yourself far too short. You understand the importance of bringing in a wider audience, and you realize that it is a desireable thing. With all due respect to K(as he does do a hell of a job), how many people do you think can understand his writings that don't already read this site that may be interested and would learn anything?

Like I said, I know my limitations and I know it falls far short of anything K has to offer, however there are things that I know I can write about but haven’t necessarily got around to it yet (a look at current FSAA methods being one that I keep procrastinating on), however I think you’ll find a fair amount of my knowledge is disseminated through the reviews/investigations I’ve done, so its kind of broken up into piecemeal bits.

 

[Sharkfood]

Well, one thing that is for certain- and is a repeating cycle... and that is some people will believe only what they want to and disregard all else. It's a proven point just by reading of this thread.

I also agree with Dave's standpoint of subjective vs. biased... and it's illustrated by the numbers of people that still think 32-bit was a practical consumer 3D feature on the TNT, and the same with HW T&L on the Geforce256. There are a few that are now trying to insist that banded, grainy, attrocious 16-bit was somehow superior in color/quality than the post-filtered, dithered output as well. There just is no point in arguing with these kinds of subjective opinions.

What I do not understand is the assertion that such subjective findings would be some sign of bias. If someone states they prefer the image quality of Quake2 in software mode over OpenGL/3D accelerated mode, then by all means let them make their point by description (i.e. WHY they feel this way, what are the key elements that formulate this opinion)... and if there are none, then it's clearly bias. But in all the cases here on B3D, there has never been a situation such as this. A subjective finding has *always* been qualified with ".. because of XYZ.." and usually a plethora of data including screenshots, benchmarks, theory of reasoning, probe, analysis and the like. They have also never had to resort to "cheating" or doctoring of data either. You dont see B3D articles ripped or taken down like you see on so many sites. If popular opinion contradicts a set of rationalized findings by the folks here, too bad as the article will stand. This is the difference between providing well thought-out, rationalized articles versus thrown-together, marketing/PR-laden trash like so many other 3D sites.

I agree B3D has never been a site to "learn" anything new, but I do appreciate that over the years they have questioned, analyzed and illustrated interest in the same questions most other 3D enthusiasts come across regularly. There is way too much head-scratching going on when looking at 3D technology and it's refreshing that the folks here are willing to stop and say "Hmm.. that's odd.." rather than just print something loaded with curious findings that leave more unanswered questions than answered. This is probably the main reason I despise so many other sites- their complete ability to post spurious, self-conflicting and unusual information without the slightest hint of query or analysis.

Obviously as 3D technology advances, and IHVs get more tight lipped about their IP, it will become more and more time consuming to try and research/case study various aspects of the hardware and drivers. I see this being the main reason why the forums have been a better source of this (less, of course, the occasional noise of raging IHV wars) as of late.. since 100 people with knowledge of 3D and with the hardware can check/cross-check findings easier than two or three guys with a web host... and simply self-filter out the noise and try to carry on the main gist of the discussion.

Just my $0.02,
-Shark

 

[nAo]

What I do not understand is the assertion that such subjective findings would be some sign of bias.

Well, when subjective findings go most of the time in the same direction (you know what I mean) then I call it bias.

ciao,
Marco

 

[nggalai]

What I do not understand is the assertion that such subjective findings would be some sign of bias.

Well, when subjective findings go most of the time in the same direction (you know what I mean) then I call it bias.

ciao,
Marco

*nod*

As I understand it, somebody is biased if he/she is actively searching for and distributing such "findings" on a regular basis.

ta,
-Sascha.rb

 

[Dave]

What I do not understand is the assertion that such subjective findings would be some sign of bias.

Well, when subjective findings go most of the time in the same direction (you know what I mean) then I call it bias.

ciao,
Marco

Thats nice, but we didn't go in the same direction all of the time and many times we went in the opposite direction.

 

[Randell]

Dave the fact is you criticised nVidia's hardware design choices. It doenst matter if it was fair or objective, unfair or subjective. It does't matter if 3dfx or S3 or ATI were also criticised equally or unequally.

You criticised nVidia, ergo Beyond3d=biased.

 

[pascal]

Dave and others,

Funny that after all these years people come back to say that you are biased. Why they didnt criticized the articles one buy one at the proper time?

You should only write things like "This hardware/tech is so good, buy one now" and everybody will be happy

Dont think, it is too dangerous in the mass market internet.

 

[Geeforcer]

There have been arguments about that at the time as well, in all shapes and sized. Limited usefulness of "static T&L" Vs the need to start somewhere, hardware/software precedence, huge arguments about FSAA whitepaper 3dfx commissioned from B3D, etc. Dave and then Kristof getting jobs at 3dfx only added fuel to the fire.

IMO, B3D was somewhat partial to 3dfx at the time, rather then anti-anybody, hence I don't see what any of these past events have to do with the site 2 years later.

 

[RussSchultz]

Dave the fact is you criticised nVidia's hardware design choices. It doenst matter if it was fair or objective, unfair or subjective. It does't matter if 3dfx or S3 or ATI were also criticised equally or unequally.

You criticised nVidia, ergo Beyond3d=biased.

Considering DarkBlu, BenSkywalker, nAo, and other well versed notables are saying they felt that B3D had biased tendencies and were just off in left field on a couple of topics, shouldn't that make you stop and think "well, maybe there's something to this"? Especially considering these folks tend to stay away from the heinous penis waving threads?

[edit: remove a few superflouous adjectives]

 

[marco]

Pheew that was a long one...
It seems that you are picking things for the convience of writing your post. In the days of 3dfx, I alway stated they were wrong with many things that could not be defended...things like not having 32bit color, not a real OpenGL ICD...etc.

The problem is that we lost a lot of content, when we suddenly were without our server and it seems my reviews of the tnt (2) were among them. So I can defend myself based on these articles.

Both Kristof and Dave were completely right at the time on T+L, the first geforce series had T+L and delivered nothing in games, it took till the geforce II to become the T+L engine really usefull. That seems to happen over again also. FSAA is a good example. Geforce III can use it, however no normal person would turn it on, due to the rahter big impact on the framerate...now with Geforce 4 things changes.

Nvidia indeed is on the cornerstone of new technology, altough their marketing strategy is not that nice (I have seen it in action), but so is ATI and 3Dlabs.

Picking some lines of an article and saying we are pro or against some 3dchip is a little bit easy. These articles were written to let the people know how things work and that there are/were no perfect solutions.

For appearing no new indepth articles...
I see 5 articles posted in 2002. But you have made up your mind.
Look we are trying to get this site going again, that takes time and money. We relaunched the site +/- 6 months ago, we had to build up everything again. I have/am re-written/writing a complete backofffice (which we needed) and Wavey is working very hard on site level things also. We cannot do it all at the same time.

That is the true issue right now, we are in the middle of building the site.
You will see articles appearing from me and wavey and others. Shame we have actual day jobs...

Now if you would excuse me, I have work to do....review is coming...

 

[Randell]

[quote="RussSchultz]Considering DarkBlu, BenSkywalker, nAo, and other well versed notables are saying they felt that B3D had biased tendencies and were just off in left field on a couple of topics, shouldn't that make you stop and think "well, maybe there's something to this"? Especially considering these folks tend to stay away from the heinous penis waving threads?[/quote]

just becasue people can be careful about expressing their particular 'bias' doesn't make them any less biased. Its quite easy to stay out of the penis waving threads if you want to.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Wow just back from vacation (Nascar Event at Watkins Glen) and I must say after reading this thread...and <cough> seeing Legion 88 and Skywalker talking about 3DFX AGAIN
3DFX is gone guys and since then all guns pointed to ATI....its like the old Beyond3D again.

I think its time to move on...don't you.

 

[pascal]

Considering DarkBlu, BenSkywalker, nAo, and other well versed notables are saying they felt that B3D had biased tendencies and were just off in left field on a couple of topics, shouldn't that make you stop and think "well, maybe there's something to this"? Especially considering these folks tend to stay away from the heinous penis waving threads?

IIRC one of these "well versed notables" was incredibilly insulting some time ago

 

[RussSchultz]

Well then, you must be right.

B3D always equals unbiased fair and honest reporting;

Anybody suggesting otherwise must be a biased fool.


Ok, sarcasm off. If you really wonder why some companies weren't cooperative with B3D and can only come up with "because they only want to deal with suckups", you really need to examine some alternative theories and/or partake in some mind expanding drugs to break through the walls you've built up.

For example, the T&L article was one of the best/worst examples I can come up with for exemplifying the odd prevailing wind of the time. How could a knowledgable group of people come up with as many reasons as they could as to why hardware T&L was bad and post that as an indepth article? Heck, several pages of the article was a advert for tile based rendering. Beyond that, the contents of the article seemed to parrot the 3dfx interviewers responses.

And why, again, shouldn't any company get an idea that there was some favoritism going on?

Right. I forgot. It must be because they only like suckups.

 

[Dave]

You forget that certain companies had many chances long before certain articles to work with us and they chose not to..

 

[noko]

Gesh, are you guys debating articles written years ago?? This is today, many moons later. I hope B3D criticize Nvidia, ATI, Matox ext. when needed. That is the best thing to do for them if they are going down the wrong path, feedback for them to learn by. T&L a couple of years ago , who cares, now it is important back then it wasn't on the top ten list as far as I see it. Lets move on from this silliness.

 

[RussSchultz]

I hope B3D criticize Nvidia, ATI, Matox ext. when needed.

I agree, and praise when needed, also. And look at technology, theories, and implementations but stay vendor agnostic.

Its a tall order, but I think the B3D crew is up to it, unless they think they're somehow immune to prejudice that naturally creeps into everybody's thinking--especially when it hits close to home (e.g. working for a competitor).