Reverend at The Pulpit #10

[digitalwanderer]

Does this suprise anyone? I'm not trying to sound like an apologist for NVIDIA but why wouldn't, or perhaps shouldn't, they try and leverage a unique feature(s) their current chips have over the competition?

Surprise, no; disapoint, yes.

Why shouldn't they try and provide the best experience across the broadest range would be my question, but it's a moot point since they'll do what they want/are paid to do.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Does this suprise anyone?

Yes, from a technical perspective.

I'm not trying to sound like an apologist for NVIDIA but why wouldn't, or perhaps shouldn't, they try and leverage a unique feature(s) their current chips have over the competition?

Of course nVidia should try and leverage their own unique features. But effectively not allowing the competition to leverage THEIR features (which is what this sounds like), is where you go over the line.

Based on what Rev said, ATI had approached them earlier to get PS 2.0 support. I can't imagine why this would fall through (especially for a follow-up A title where ATI's return on investment would be clear), unless nVidia's "agreement" with the developer / publisher effectively prohibits it.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I know which game and developer Rev was referring to, and the strange thing in my mind is that it's a sequel to an A-title game that's going to sell fairly well (unless of course the developer screws the sequel's design up).

Hmm. Halo2 or GTA: Sin City ? Spill the beans - you're not under NDA are you?

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Does this suprise anyone? I'm not trying to sound like an apologist for NVIDIA but why wouldn't, or perhaps shouldn't, they try and leverage a unique feature(s) their current chips have over the competition?

Because it also screws all their NV3x SM2.0 customers. Goes to show Nvidia lied about those cards' 2.0 capability when they sold them, or is happy to now screw over those customers. They've paid money to have them orphaned as far as SM 2.0 support goes.

 

[John Reynolds]

Hmm. Halo2 or GTA: Sin City ? Spill the beans - you're not under NDA are you?

Heh, no, I'm not under NDA but if Dave or Rev wanted to reveal this info they would've. I'm not about to in public or private. I'm in stealth mode from now on when it comes to this topic.

 

[Zaphod]

Because it also screws all their NV3x SM2.0 customers. Goes to show Nvidia lied about those cards' 2.0 capability when they sold them, or is happy to now screw over those customers. They've paid money to have them orphaned as far as SM 2.0 support goes.

The key phrase beeing "screwed [...] as far as SM 2.0 support goes". To be honest; wheren't they (in terms of speed) already? If nVidia can coach developers into designing with a DX8 baseline with high-end content beeing based on shader model 3.0 - this might in fact improve the longlivety of a NV3x as a viable viodeocard. (As opposed to 'grade A' developers adopting a SM2.0 baseline sooner rather than later.) It's not as if nVidia would be bothered to keep 'fixing' the shader speed in any upcoming DX9 game now that they have NV40 out of the door. Killing two birds with one stone so to speak. Handicapping the competition while playing to the strengths of your whole lineup - top to bottom.

For the record: I don't like or endorse the kind of deal that is beeing hinted at here. Just beeing pragmatic.

 

[Nite_Hawk]

I wouldn't think it would be Halo2 given Microsoft's involvement with ATI these days.

In a bitter Irish sort of way I could see it being Halflife2...

Nite_Hawk

 

[Reverend]

First of all, there was much deliberation on my part before I decided to reveal that piece of info. This was because the developer told me that it (and some graphics stuff, like current SM 3.0 performance on NV40s, like how much one card is beating the other card in a demo shown at E3... obviously, don't bother asking me which card is which, coz I can't tell) was confidential info. I know (and I'm sure Dave knows too, most probably from his good relationship with ATI and what ATI tells him) this is not an isolated incidence -- the way things has been going since the TWIMTBP campaign got started should tell us that this can be (and already is, going by this case alone) a very likely scenario industry-wide.

I just wanted (as I have done on other occasions on other topics) you guys to know. Doing so in this forum is less likely to be, er, "expensive" for me.

I know most (if not all) are pissed at this particular developer now but I am most certainly not in a position to tell him what Joe would like me to. Just like ATI had made decisions on their roadmap, the developer made a decision. I know drawing this parallel is sucky but the point I want to make is that certain decisions are made and you can't really tell if they'll come out good or bad until the product ships.

Also, to make it clear : this particular developer probably had nothing to do with the decision to dump SM 2.0 . In time, when I/B3D talk to him and reveal our conversations publicly (perhaps an interview, or an article on this upcoming game... maybe in August, when marketing for the game kicks off) and you know who he is, don't go cursing him! (he's a nice guy).

Currently, I'm trying to get more info out of this developer about this thing. It's a sensitive issue, for sure, and even if he is willing to tell me what exactly the deal is, I'm sure I can't talk about it. Well... perhaps some tidbits in another Pulpit thread...

And I'm sure you all want to know what game it is... the staff at B3D knows, coz I posted this bit of info in a private B3D forum (staff only, one you guys can't see) a little while back... and I can't tell you. Suffice to say, it's a sequel to an enormously successful game and all talk about NVIDIA paying them enough to offset things is just illogical. And this is a big development+publishing house I'm talking about... I think they're big enough to refuse "payoffs" from NVIDIA. Then again, nothing is ever sure, is it?

I've probably said more than I should already. Hppe I don't get in trouble...

 

[digitalwanderer]

Aw, can't I curse at him just a little? It's kind of a trademark...

 

[muted]

just taking a guess here
but i'm thinking EQ 2.. i heard they started coding sm 3.0 recently ( few months ) can't be far cry 2 , far cry already had sm 2.0 support so ..

 

[Althornin]

Does this suprise anyone? I'm not trying to sound like an apologist for NVIDIA but why wouldn't, or perhaps shouldn't, they try and leverage a unique feature(s) their current chips have over the competition?

Because it also screws all their NV3x SM2.0 customers. Goes to show Nvidia lied about those cards' 2.0 capability when they sold them, or is happy to now screw over those customers. They've paid money to have them orphaned as far as SM 2.0 support goes.

Or it means that this is a tacit admission from nVidia that thier GFFX 5x00 series only had SM2.0 as a marketing checkbox and is too slow to run real SM2.0 effects.
If you accept that, then this move makes all the sense in the world - because to run at decent speed, the GFFX 5x00 cards would be running at PS1.1 anyways...

 

[FUDie]

And I'm sure you all want to know what game it is... the staff at B3D knows, coz I posted this bit of info in a private B3D forum (staff only, one you guys can't see) a little while back... and I can't tell you. Suffice to say, it's a sequel to an enormously successful game and all talk about NVIDIA paying them enough to offset things is just illogical. And this is a big development+publishing house I'm talking about... I think they're big enough to refuse "payoffs" from NVIDIA. Then again, nothing is ever sure, is it?

I've probably said more than I should already. Hope I don't get in trouble...

Why don't you just come out and say it's Danny LePage and Splinter Cell X? Only game I am aware of where the developer said they would do only PS 1.1 and PS 3.0.

-FUDie

 

[Miksu]

Why don't you just come out and say it's Danny LePage and Splinter Cell X? Only game I am aware of where the developer said they would do only PS 1.1 and PS 3.0.

To me "it's a sequel to an enormously successful game" sounds like it's a second part of some series, not part X. So, I would guess Everquest 2 too (or mebbe Sims 2 or Half-Life2

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

StarCraft 2?

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Because it also screws all their NV3x SM2.0 customers. Goes to show Nvidia lied about those cards' 2.0 capability when they sold them, or is happy to now screw over those customers. They've paid money to have them orphaned as far as SM 2.0 support goes.

Or it means that this is a tacit admission from nVidia that thier GFFX 5x00 series only had SM2.0 as a marketing checkbox and is too slow to run real SM2.0 effects.
If you accept that, then this move makes all the sense in the world - because to run at decent speed, the GFFX 5x00 cards would be running at PS1.1 anyways...

Exactly, but that just means Nvidia sold all these "PS2.0" cards *knowing* they were incapable of running PS2.0, and were happy to lie to customers whilst arranging to pay developers not to support the same features that Nvidia were crowing about to customers.

Cinematic Computing? More like Slimy Lying Cheating Fraudulent Computing. This has the potential to be a class action suit.

 

[MfA]

Meh, who cares ... FPSs are the biggest pushers of technology, and FPS developers are not in a position to do this due to competition.

 

[Hanners]

Battlefield 1942 2? (I think it's just called Battlefield 2, actually).

It all fits in in my mind - Sequel to an A-list title, EA are the publishers and big part of TWIMTBP, EA games have exhibited some 'interesting' properties with regards to nVidia boards in the past....

And in case you're wondering, no I'm not privvy to the private staff forum here, so I am guessing and not stating a fact...

 

[digitalwanderer]

Are you guessing or do you know that for a fact? I mean now that you're on staff here.... :|

 

[Reverend]

Developer wrote back with a bunch of very informative stuff. Most importantly is that he now says decision on "going SM 3.0 only and no SM 2.0" hasn't actually been taken. With this being a business decision, it comes down to how much money is involved.

But it is also about looking forward -- continuation of (= planning for) the game series and the all-important (next-gen) console market.

Love to tell you guys more (especially the console part) but this will have to do.

 

[Heathen]

What's the odds it's the next SPlinter CEll game? Hasn't Dean already mentioned it's SM3.0 only?