Joe DeFuria said:
yes, joe, i am. but that IHV has all rights to say 'up yours' to the respective developer who made those coding errors...
Well, I was just asking you if you were aware of that fact. I didn't ask for further comments or your opinion on the situation. (Can we stop with that now?)
joe, my saying that i was not asking you how you felt about it was NOT that your personal opinion on the matter was not welcome (as otherwise i wouldn't be leading this very conversation with you in the first place), rather that i failed to see your answer to my question from what you said in your respective post. and i considered clearing this question rather important for our discussion. i apologize if it sounded offending in any way. really.
Joe said:
yes, joe, i am. but that IHV has all rights to say 'up yours' to the respective developer who made those coding errors.
Well, of course they have the "right" to do that. But no more right than the software developer has to say UP YOURS to the respective IHV (my game won't support your card then) who has some obsure driver anomoly that only affects his game.
The point is, in
both cases, (IHV being stubborn, or the developer being stubborn) the consumer suffers. Because the game won't run properly or at all on the hardware in question.
so your point being is that if both the IHV and the developer are sensible and good-willed eventually the consumer will be presented with an A-class title, and everybody will live happily ever after. yep, that's how things look from the broadest prespective. when you get down to details, though, things start to get more into the realms of
efficiency and
expedience - an A-class title today is maybe a B-class title in a year. or maybe no title at all (as publishers tend to be rather picky re the deadlines). that's why devs
bitch on the IHV for this and that. and dropping support for a given piece of hardware is by far the easiest thing to do technically, but it's a lose-lose scenario for all parties involved, and especially so for the devs, that's why devs prefer bitching to showing the finger to IHVs.
now, to get more on topic, do you believe ati acted in the b) manner in derek's case?
It's possible, considering the amount of 'press' and bitchin Derek does. ("Squeaky wheel" theory.)
it's possible, indeed. though, technically speaking, it'd be cheaper for ati if they simply came up with a simple, short article showing how derek screwed up in his code (not necesserily using his name there), and handed that article to a fansite, don't you think?
However, I do tend to think it's A. That Derek is doing something that probably "should work" on the 9000 series, but doesn't. And for the 6th or 7th time (I'm losing count), and to get REALLY back on topic:
If it is A, do you think that Derek is justified in going so over the top on this issue considering this is new hardware, and it seems to work with no texturing issues on all other games known?
no, joe, i don't think that derek behaviour is particularly justified.. i mean, especially from his own viewpoint - he should be able to realize perfectly well that the time he spends 'going over the top' could have been better spent in trying to get his issues workaround-ed.. at least that's what most devs in his shoes would do. but maybe he has some reasons for behaving this way, which he hasn't disclosed yet. i just dunno.
