Kyle lays it on the line

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

When reading this thread, I couldn't help but relate the same kind of thing to Kyle in that I only do what I do when I feel cornered, weak, vulnerable, teamed up on or I just generally feel everything I want will fall apart if I don't work around it (the problem).

You missed one thing: when you are in the wrong, and you know it, but you try not to admit it to yourself or those around you, because you think such an admission would make you weak. This of course is a fallacy - refusing to admit your mistakes in the face of overwhelming evidence *is* the weakness. The ability to realise this and reasess your viewpoint regardless of what others think is the true strength.

Kyle seems to think that "sticking to your guns" shows strength of character, where it actually is a blinkered and stubborn road into ego-driven ignorance.

 

[brent_anderson]

I think it's irrelevant whether Epic "approved" or "disapproved" of it since it had nothing to do with Epic's code.

Agreed!

I was just answering a question in the thread about the confusion concerning Epic’s approval or disapproval.

Clearly one popular web site is making it "appear" as if Epic knew and approved of the "optimization"

Brent

 

[StealthHawk]

I haven't seen anything indicating nVidia asked for Epic's approval--and only circumstantial evidence to support the idea that Epic even advised nVidia in this particular case.

And yet unnamed Nvidia staff have been giving this reduction in IQ legitimacy by telling their pet websites (and by extension the public who read the websites), that it's all okay because it's been "approved" by Epic.

Just when you think Nvidia PR can't sink any lower, they find another way of disgusting me.

That really doesn't tell us much about anything. Whether or not Epic approves of NVIDIA's optimizations from a tradeoff perspective is irrelevant.

More importantly, what does Epic think about NVIDIA not allowing the user to get full quality, if anything. Do they approve of that?

As has been stated many times, the problem is not that NVIDIA is offering a compromise between performance and IQ, but that they are forcing it down everyone's throats.

 

[swanlee]

It's not only the fact they are forcing it down our throats it's the fact that they have done this to obviously increase fps in benchmarks without the knowledge of anyone. It only happens in UT2k3 and that is a widely benchmarked game. Again nvidia's attempt to fool everyone.

 

[WaltC]

...

More importantly, what does Epic think about NVIDIA not allowing the user to get full quality, if anything. Do they approve of that?

As has been stated many times, the problem is not that NVIDIA is offering a compromise between performance and IQ, but that they are forcing it down everyone's throats.

I think as his quoted remarks in this thread appear to clearly state, Sweeny (Epic et al) simply doesn't care about what an IHV does with its drivers relating to perfomance tradeoffs involving diminished IQ. I think his remarks indicate that he views that particular aspect of things as a matter between an IHV and its customers, not involving Epic. He makes himself available to IHVs who might wish to "chew the fat" on various ways to achieve tradeoffs like this, but Epic doesn't dictate to the IHV what it will or won't "be allowed" to do. Indeed, Epic is no position to do something like that, has no such authority, nor would it want to, IMO.

To that end, I think the framing of this issue should not be forgotten: it's something that affects the IQ of UT2K3 only when running on nVidia products; everyone else is unaffected by this particular situation.

Edit: typos

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

Developers don't want to be sucked into this soap opera. I know I sure as hell wouldn't want to be shoved in the middle of it.

 

[WaltC]

Developers don't want to be sucked into this soap opera. I know I sure as hell wouldn't want to be shoved in the middle of it.

I completely agree. Developers need to be very careful to be seen as neutral in regards to IHVs, or at most simply as "pro-API" in their convictions. Any other approach will hurt them to some degree, IMO.

I don't know what nVidia paid to Epic/Atari to have the companies accept the unusual condition of carrying an IHV's paid advertisement in the actual body of their game, but I can guarantee it's but a tiny fraction of what these companies make selling their software into the general 3D market, which is anything but IHV specific. I hope they'll step back from this a bit and realize that the possibility of alienating their potential customers outweighs whatever income they can receive from nVidia to place ads directly into their games. They need to more precisely differentiate the goals of Epic/Atari (selling their software) from those of the nVidia Corporation (selling nVidia hardware.) The co-mingling here I find not only distasteful but illogical. Even though I replaced the nVidia logo with an ATi logo long ago, my preference would still be to remove all IHV commercials from the game itself. At the very least Epic should make this optional from the end user's position as a "feature" he could completely eliminate from the game's loading sequence if desired.

OTOH, I don't care how many folders on their program CDs they sell to IHVs to distribute promotional material along with their games. It's coding advertisements into the game software itself that is so unattractive and sends so many untruthful connotations (Such as the presence of the logo indicating a preferential treatment in the software for nVidia hardware, in some completely undefined manner.) Sweeny has made it clear several times that no such preferential treatment exists--which is well and good, because if he said otherwise then he'd have to define it...

 

[digitalwanderer]

I think part of the problem is that nVidia's PR represents themselves as a greater part of the gaming scene than they actually are to game developers, if that makes any sense, giving them a skewed perspective on the actual make-up of the gaming scene.

 

[Reverend]

Developers don't want to be sucked into this soap opera. I know I sure as hell wouldn't want to be shoved in the middle of it.

I completely agree. Developers need to be very careful to be seen as neutral in regards to IHVs, or at most simply as "pro-API" in their convictions. Any other approach will hurt them to some degree, IMO.

I don't know what nVidia paid to Epic/Atari to have the companies accept the unusual condition of carrying an IHV's paid advertisement in the actual body of their game, but I can guarantee it's but a tiny fraction of what these companies make selling their software into the general 3D market, which is anything but IHV specific. I hope they'll step back from this a bit and realize that the possibility of alienating their potential customers outweighs whatever income they can receive from nVidia to place ads directly into their games.

I doubt they don't/didn't think of this possibility. However it is my opinion that such customers is a tiny fraction of the game buying public. People like some of the guys here is that tiny fraction of course. Most gamers don't care what advertisement is placed in a game they bought... as long as they can play the game on their system.

Perhaps we should all take a step back too?

Even though I replaced the nVidia logo with an ATi logo long ago...

And, really, why did you do this? What possible effect can this have, other than one that satisfies only yourself (by doing something that replaces a small offensive, to you, part of a game you bought)?

UT2003 runs just as well, if not better, on ATI parts, regardless of the fact that NVIDIA's TWIMTBP logo is there. If someone already owns a ATI card and the game runs satisfying well for him, do you think he would ditch his ATI card and go get a NVIDIA card just because of this NVIDIA logo?

"Intel Inside" worked well initially... it no longer has the same effect because folks are just that much smarter nowadays.

 

[Althornin]

UT2003 runs just as well, if not better, on ATI parts, regardless of the fact that NVIDIA's TWIMTBP logo is there.

It just bothers me that i must watch a short ad every time i start the stupid game that i freaking bought.

 

[Doomtrooper]

UT2003 runs just as well, if not better, on ATI parts, regardless of the fact that NVIDIA's TWIMTBP logo is there. If someone already owns a ATI card and the game runs satisfying well for him, do you think he would ditch his ATI card and go get a NVIDIA card just because of this NVIDIA logo?

Yes it does, but that is not due to developer support, in fact UT 2003 didn't get tested on a R300 until very late in the development stages...like almost gold.

UT2003 runs better on ATI because it is simply better hardware, and could run even better if epic would have optimized the engine more towards the R300 featureset.

If a consumer buys a $700 dollar video card, then buys a title that displays some logo from a competing company that you don't have, it doesn't give the person a 'warm fuzzy feeling' that the game is running optimally.

I too replaced the Logo, and ideally if Developers want to please everyone they should be autodetecting and displaying "Radeon 9800 Detected, optimizing engine"

In fact I would rather see 'Opengl 1.5' Logos displayed or DX9 Optimized vs. one company.

 

[WaltC]

...
UT2003 runs just as well, if not better, on ATI parts, regardless of the fact that NVIDIA's TWIMTBP logo is there. If someone already owns a ATI card and the game runs satisfying well for him, do you think he would ditch his ATI card and go get a NVIDIA card just because of this NVIDIA logo?

"Intel Inside" worked well initially... it no longer has the same effect because folks are just that much smarter nowadays.

Well, "Intel inside" wasn't a misleading statement that I recall... If a box has an "Intel inside" sticker on it the chances are pretty good it's got "Intel inside"...

What I'm talking about were the dozens if not hundreds of posts I slogged through last year in which people mistakenly believed the game was "optimized for nVidia hardware"--when it's not--simply as a result of the ad's presence in the game. As I said I have no objection to them distributing whatever IHV advertising they wish on their program CDs--just think it's a poor idea to distribute it within the game itself as it leads to false assumptions by those who see it (everybody) and don't understand that it's nothing but advertising (most everybody, judging by the number of posts I've read misconstruing the subject since the game shipped)...It would even help if Epic had placed the words "paid advertisement" at the top of the page just as print magazines do for advertisers who copy the format of the magazine to frame their ads, hoping readers will mistake it for magazine content instead of paid advertising.

Then, you've got nVidia doing press releases about unidentified "special feature support" in upcoming software for only nVidia products, when in fact that doesn't seem to be the case at all. Indeed, canvassing a couple of year's worth of EA press releases I couldn't find a single one even naming nVidia, much less corroborating nVidia's press releases on the subject. Yet, because of the releases generated by nVidia to that effect I have seen during the last several months people in forums everywhere, including B3d, talking about this unidentified "special feature support" in upcoming 3d titles. Unfortunately, when some people see a press release they believe it first and think about it later...

I guess what I'm saying is that I personally find it offensive for these reasons, and because I think it is just tacky and in poor taste besides--it wouldn't matter to me if it was an ATi, PowerVR logo or whatever--it just doesn't belong inside the content of the game itself (although a 3dfx logo there would be kind of funny at this stage...) As a gamer, I don't want my $50 software polluted by advertisers, thank you... I get quite enough of that in magazines and on the Internet, but at least in those formats it's justifiable as the advertisers support the information providers, not me--kind of like suffering through ads on public television.

Now, I will say this--if Epic/Atari wants to slash the sales price of UT2K4 to $25 right off the bat and let nVidia pick up the tab for the difference to run its ad--that I could probably live with as the ad would then be benefitting me directly. But paying the same price for software with ads that I used to pay for software without any ads? Not very appealing. When I buy gaming software I want to play the game the way it's meant to be played, instead of going shopping and looking at ads.

My first choice with the ad would have been to find a way to disable it completely so that the games loads sans advertisements of any type. Failing that, it was only my second choice to substitute an ATi logo instead, since if I had to look at something against my will I'd prefer to look at that... I suppose I could simply substitute a black screen instead--but after paying full retail price for the software, why should I have to do anything just to run the software? IMO, if we are dissatisfied with this kind of thing and say nothing about it the publishers might erroneously conclude that we don't care and start peppering games with ads interwoven into the content. If you don't mind the ads, that's fine--but I do, and if they keep doing it I'm going to start "stepping back" from their software, most likely.

 

[Myrmecophagavir]

I hate the idea of the TWIMTBP program, and find it ironic that UT2003 is presumably calling for trilinear filtering yet getting this pseudotrilinear function instead. Hardly the way it's meant to be!

Anyway Walt and everyone else who wants to get rid of the logo can do so with this tiny file:

http://www.iamlj.btinternet.co.uk/Unreal/Logos/UT2003QuickStart.zip

It skips the startup logo entirely and takes you straight to the main menu. Take that Nvidia!

 

[WaltC]

I hate the idea of the TWIMTBP program, and find it ironic that UT2003 is presumably calling for trilinear filtering yet getting this pseudotrilinear function instead. Hardly the way it's meant to be!

Anyway Walt and everyone else who wants to get rid of the logo can do so with this tiny file:

http://www.iamlj.btinternet.co.uk/Unreal/Logos/UT2003QuickStart.zip

It skips the startup logo entirely and takes you straight to the main menu. Take that Nvidia!

Thanks, Myrm....Heh, I'd almost forgotten how pleasant a standard startup is for a UT game...

 

[andypski]

I hate the idea of the TWIMTBP program, and find it ironic that UT2003 is presumably calling for trilinear filtering yet getting this pseudotrilinear function instead. Hardly the way it's meant to be!

Anyway Walt and everyone else who wants to get rid of the logo can do so with this tiny file:

http://www.iamlj.btinternet.co.uk/Unreal/Logos/UT2003QuickStart.zip

It skips the startup logo entirely and takes you straight to the main menu. Take that Nvidia!

Thanks, Myrm....Heh, I'd almost forgotten how pleasant a standard startup is for a UT game...

[sarcasm]
Of course, by using this file you are running the risk that the TWIMTBP logo at the start functions like a 3DMark splash screen, and that by disabling it you might trigger a driver bug in some hardware that slows the game down and mysteriously enables full trilinear filtering...
[/sarcasm]

I don't think this happens in this case, but you can never be too sure with those tricky driver bugs - they can just pop up anywhere, it seems...

 

[jimbob0i0]

I hate the idea of the TWIMTBP program, and find it ironic that UT2003 is presumably calling for trilinear filtering yet getting this pseudotrilinear function instead. Hardly the way it's meant to be!

Anyway Walt and everyone else who wants to get rid of the logo can do so with this tiny file:

http://www.iamlj.btinternet.co.uk/Unreal/Logos/UT2003QuickStart.zip

It skips the startup logo entirely and takes you straight to the main menu. Take that Nvidia!

Thanks, Myrm....Heh, I'd almost forgotten how pleasant a standard startup is for a UT game...

[sarcasm]
Of course, by using this file you are running the risk that the TWIMTBP logo at the start functions like a 3DMark splash screen, and that by disabling it you might trigger a driver bug in some hardware that slows the game down and mysteriously enables full trilinear filtering...
[/sarcasm]

I don't think this happens in this case, but you can never be too sure with those tricky driver bugs - they can just pop up anywhere, it seems...

LMAO - anyone have a GF5800/5900 handy to do some testing on for IQ and fps with and without the TWIMTBP screen? hehe

 

[WaltC]

[sarcasm]
Of course, by using this file you are running the risk that the TWIMTBP logo at the start functions like a 3DMark splash screen, and that by disabling it you might trigger a driver bug in some hardware that slows the game down and mysteriously enables full trilinear filtering...
[/sarcasm]

I don't think this happens in this case, but you can never be too sure with those tricky driver bugs - they can just pop up anywhere, it seems...

Heh... Good one! No doubt 2003 will go down as the year the phrase "driver bug" was greatly enlarged and expanded in meaning...

 

[micron]

That really made me smile