The DevRel Duel (Again)
- Thread starter zgemboandislic
- Start date
Do you see any performance difference or features difference other then different paths from Far Cry when we look at ATi and nV hardware?
Crytek went back to nV because they never really were with ATi other then a demo. Also probably even bigger reason then that, nV had Dx10 hardware that was functional in time for Crytek to do thier Dx10 port and add on. Crytek showed thier first demos on GF 3's at GDC in 1999, nV was the one that helped them with publisher contacts. nV also helped the developer of Stalker with thier publishing contacts too, and once they got it, their publisher asked nV and ATi who wants to pay more for advertising in Stalker. Alan Wake, did they jump ship from ATi, I'm not sure haven't heard anything about that.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
It was under the freaking "high end hardware" tab
That's down to a lazy developer. Nvidia makes it easy by saying they'll write the code for you, it will make their hardware look better. Developer/publisher just shrugs their shoulders, takes the donated man hours and expertise, and puts the game out anyway. Maybe ATI need more people to do dev-rel, or maybe they don't want to get into the situation where they end up writing big chunks of code for lazy developers.
It's like the situation with AA/AF. ATI/Nvidia provide AA/AF controls in their control panels, so the lazy developers don't do any AA/AF work themselves, and just expect the user to deal with it via the external controls provided by the graphics card company, even if they are not optimal solutions.
I'm sure ATI don't want to be writing a "chuck patch" for every lazy developer's game.
Depends on which version of FC offcourse.. It feels like FC was a live fire environment for all things dx9.
Oh well, Time is still money.
I thought Crytek was very close with AMD (64bit patch, etc)? Wouldn't that equal out any relationship benefit that Nvidia has (now that AMD owns ATi)?
Pardon me if I don't care in the slightest which ISV supposedly "favours" which IHV or vice versa. If I like a game I'll buy it, irrelevant to which program it belongs to, what logo I'll see in the entry or whatever else.
If any logo would mean anything outside of simple advertising, then I truly wonder why some games ran better on ATI HW than on GF's despite them belonging to the TWIMTBP program.
If any logo would mean anything outside of simple advertising, then I truly wonder why some games ran better on ATI HW than on GF's despite them belonging to the TWIMTBP program.
Crytek is also close with Intel, to tell you the truth the really don't take any sides, they just go with what ever is best for thier technology, like many developers do, there are a few that go out of those lines for sure but that isn't what these game programs are about.
Both Intel and AMD do give benefits for thier game programs too, as with AMD its a perfect fit with ATi's game program.
Its actually a very analogous situation Intel, AMD and nV, ATi when thier developers programs are compared.
Bear in mind that Crysis was also demo'ed on ATI hardware initially.
The logo itself is pretty much just "marketing" - but - there are also cases where TWIMTBP title has been intentionally crippled in terms of performance and/or features on ATI hardware
Sound_Card
Regular
And theres also cases where TWIMTBP titles are crippled on nVidia hardware which makes nVidia look like a joke. Really i dont understand the point. See my last post. If they can get 2 games released a year with unique features, well then thats fantastic, but as i said, i just want my hardware to work, which it has 99% of the time. I think the two glaring exceptions ATI had this past year in regards to constant poor performance would be AOE3 and B&W 2.
If any mod wants to do the work, could problably make a second thread out of this by now
.
Last edited by a moderator:
We have a saying here in Germany:
“Wessen Brot ich ess, dessen Lied ich sing“
“Whose bread I eat, that song I singâ€
And theres also cases where TWIMTBP titles are crippled on nVidia hardware which makes nVidia look like a joke. Really i dont understand the point. See my last post. If they can get 2 games released a year with unique features, well then thats fantastic, but as i said, i just want my hardware to work, which it has 99% of the time. I think the two glaring exceptions ATI had this past year in regards to constant poor performance would be AOE3 and B&W 2.
If any mod wants to do the work, could problably make a second thread out of this by now
Maybe I didn't really express myself clearly - crippled intentionally by the developers, where simply changing the device id of radeon to match similar tech level geforce, solved all the problems. A bit later this "fix" surfaced, the game was patched to work properly with radeons without such tricks. One of these titles was some version of Tiger Woods EA-golf-game-thingy, can't remember which though, and I remember reading of few other similar cases.
edit: of course it is possible I'm mixing things etc, but this is either way something i'm 100% sure i read about.
edit2: here's some talk about it http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-6684.html
Last edited by a moderator:
you dont see that as something trivial? I mean really how much of an impact is that going to make on a certain brand of cards sales, especially a golf game.
Such things can easily happen unintentionally. Many devs use some kind of device ID/feature table to work around driver bugs. The unfortunate reality is that they can't always rely on device caps to know whether a feature works as expected or not (and neither can they rely on IHVs to fix their drivers in time). So if someone disables a feature for a certain device ID for some reason, there's always a chance that they simply forget to re-enable it when it's fixed.
Similar threads
