What was that about Cg *Not* favoring Nvidia Hardware?

[demalion]

...
You're right, I should have looked before opening my mouth. Regardless that doesn't change the facts. A demo does not proof make.

What facts are those you refer to? Your statement reads "that fact I failed to notice doesn't change the facts", as if someone is claiming any such thing.

There is a usage of proof that implies something is conclusive. But that is why we have the phrase "conclusive proof" to clarify that usage. I agree that is what Doomtrooper got across, but you are continuing your replies with that usage with others as well.

There is another that relates to something being an indication of something being true, or to quote the dictionary, "Convincing or persuasive demonstration".

I mention this to avoid confusion going forward, as I propose to you that this demo, amongst other things, do quite successfully fit the latter definition in regards to Cg being able to harm the 3D industry (except from the viewpoint of nVidia and those nVidia users who don't care what price they pay for their card). Which is not quite the same thing as your exaggerated phrasing, of course, but I construe as the viewpoint you are attacking with it. If you want a word other than "proof" to express that, will I've been using words like "intent" and "demonstration" if that suits you better.

See my prior reply if my viewpoint and its basis requires further clarification.

 

[John Reynolds]

The market will determine whether Cg lives or dies.

If most developers find it useless, it'll die. These little flame wars will not make one bit of difference.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[demalion]

....

There's no point in using Cg - there never was.

How about writing or extending an OpenGL application on another platform besides a Microsoft one? Like Linux or MacOS? DX9 doesn't do you a whole lot of good there, and OpenGL 2.0 is still too far over the horizon to sit around and wait for...

For clarity, does your expectation include consideration of the nature of these comments?

 

[RussSchultz]

I'm sorry if proof was too strong a word.

Let me rephrase: This demo does not lend credence to the concept that Cg can harm the industry. I say this because the real world intrudes on every evil genius' mad schemes.

If any game comes out and only supports 1/3rd the population, it won't sell and will heartily piss off the retailers because they'll have to deal with the returns (regardless of how many large big bright stickers are on the box). That development house will die, the rest of the industry will go on laughing at them and their stupidity. Hopefully those that made the decision will be branded for life and forced to work helpdesk for the rest of their years.

Cg does not make games that don't run on all platforms, people make games that don't run on all platforms.

 

[demalion]

The market will determine whether Cg lives or dies.

If most developers find it useless, it'll die. These little flame wars will not make one bit of difference.

Couldn't agree more.

I don't know, I think discussions on this particular forum might indeed have an impact greater than "0" on developers. I don't think that is very far-fetched at all, do you really think it is?

But in any case, I'd say most discussions could be argued to not make "one bit of difference" with equal validity, but is that the point? I'd say whether the way the discussion is conducted manages to actually be progress meaningfully is more important.

 

[Doomtrooper]

The market will determine whether Cg lives or dies.

If most developers find it useless, it'll die. These little flame wars will not make one bit of difference.

Couldn't agree more.

The market will determine lots of things won't it, if a video card sells, if a game sells...still there is nothing wrong with us debating about FSAA, shaders...whats the point there, the market will determine that also ??
So in essence this is a important subject to debate and shouldn't be swept under the carpet as no matter what our debates are about on this forum, we have no impact yet that is what a message board is about, seeing how other people percieve things..no matter how out of whack they are.

 

[DeathKnight]

GunMetal's an Xbox game. Guess they're porting it to the PC.

 

[John Reynolds]

I don't know, I think discussions on this particular forum might indeed have an impact greater than "0" on developers. I don't think that is very far-fetched at all, do you really think it is?

I was basically agreeing with Russ that the market (ie, game developers) will determine Cg's fate.

 

[demalion]

I'm sorry if proof was too strong a word.

I wouldn't say it was "too strong", I'd say the implied usage that I myself took away did not seem the same as what others were proposing.

Let me rephrase: This demo does not lend credence to the concept that Cg can harm the industry. I say this because the real world intrudes on every evil genius' mad schemes.

?!? I plainly think you are wrong. I guess we can stop there. I've encounteered the "things will always work out" philosophical difference of opinion often enough to know we can't move forward beyond that particular issue if that is where our difference lies. That is not to say I think "things never work out", or even am opposed in some cases to "things will most likely work out", I just don't understand how "always" can be proposed as a given.

If any game comes out and only supports 1/3rd the population, it won't sell and will heartily piss off the retailers because they'll have to deal with the returns (regardless of how many large big bright stickers are on the box).

Well, nVidia is more than 1/3 still, I think, atleast of the vocal gaming public. Which might be why they think such a thing can work for them. Perhaps my own experiences with NwN have skewed my outlook.

That development house will die, the rest of the industry will go on laughing at them and their stupidity. Hopefully those that made the decision will be branded for life and forced to work helpdesk for the rest of their years.

Yes, "hopefully". It is the "will die" and "will go on laughing at them" I don't think is a given. Well, actually, with the situation with the R300, I'm more inclined to believe it will work out this way than before, but I don't equate that with a guarantee. Again, that's a philosophical difference I don't think we can reconcile.

Cg does not make games that don't run on all platforms, people make games that don't run on all platforms.

Laugh, I think you're just having a go at abusing catch phrases now!

 

[demalion]

I don't know, I think discussions on this particular forum might indeed have an impact greater than "0" on developers. I don't think that is very far-fetched at all, do you really think it is?

I was basically agreeing with Russ that the market (ie, game developers) will determine Cg's fate.

Oh, sure. In the context of this thread, my own disagreement is about whether it will cause problems in the meantime, not about what will determine whether it will live or die eventually, and the way you quoted that seemed to address that discussion.

 

[DemoCoder]

This game would have been NVidia specific whether it used Cg or not. The Cg aspect of this discussion is a red herring. Gun Metal is an X-Box game written for NVidia hardware. Had Cg not been available, this PC "port" probably would have used lots of NVidia OpenGL extensions, so it wouldn't have run on ATI cards anyway.

The Cg runtime can be deployed in a hardware independent fashion if the developer codes their game in a hardware independent fashion. They can do this by simply using the DirectX Cg runtime for example.

The original discussions of old are still correct: The Cg *LANGUAGE* is not NV specific. If it is, then DirectX9 is NV specific. It is the developers who write games that rely on vendor-specific OpenGL extensions without providing a fallback that are the problem.

Boycott Yeti studios for a BAD PORT. Boycott them because they didn't provide fallbaks. But the fact that Gun Metal doesn't run on other cards has nothing to do with the capability of CG to run on other cards. In fact, it doesn't have much to do with NVidia's Cg runtime either, since NVidia provides a generic DirectX8 runtime that should run on ANY DX8 class card.

 

[Reverend]

Cg can favor NVIDIA hardware.

Oh wait... heck, even OpenGL can favor NVIDIA hardware.

Why? How? Who makes such decisions?



As DemoCoder said, Cg is a red herring in this discussion. It helps to do some checking before someone allows his emotions to take over and make a thread about this.

BTW, it's the consumers that determine the future of 3D... not NVIDIA or ATI or whoever. Nobody is going to go out and buy a NVIDIA video card because they discovered the game they just bought won't run on anything else.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Gun Metal is an X-Box game written for NVidia hardware. Had Cg not been available, this PC "port" probably would have used lots of NVidia OpenGL extensions, so it wouldn't have run on ATI cards anyway.

Lots of "ifs" in there.

Isn't the demo DirectX? (Someone correct me if I'm wrong). What's OpenGL got to do with this?

The demo runs on DX 8.0 nVidia hardware. Why won't it run on any other DX8 or DX9 level hardware from any other vendor?

 

[tamattack]

Cg does not make games that don't run on all platforms, people make games that don't run on all platforms.

Hrrrmmmm... so far, all I see is 'proof' that people who use Cg make games that don't run on all platforms.

Argue all you like about how Cg is not specifically limited or whether the dev made poor choices in implementation, but the fact of the matter at this point in time is that the only game (demo) available right now and advertised as using Cg, does not run on other IHV's hardware.

Maybe that will change tomorrow, or the next day. But for today, you have less 'proof' than the other guy.

 

[tamattack]

BTW, it's the consumers that determine the future of 3D... not NVIDIA or ATI or whoever.

That is true... but where do these consumers go for information before spending their money (well, those few who actually do research beforehand)? Places like here... that's why we need to have this discussion and not sweep it under the rug.

Nobody is going to go out and buy a NVIDIA video card because they discovered the game they just bought won't run on anything else.

Maybe, maybe not. And I have actually seen this happen before.

Here's another thought: how many of those people will think twice before considering an ATI card the next time they upgrade? <-- This is the entire point!

 

[Doomtrooper]

Nobody is going to go out and buy a NVIDIA video card because they discovered the game they just bought won't run on anything else.

Disagree on a grand scale, I linked Neverwinter Nights forums about shiny water...not only was the game developer tech support stating If you want Shiny Water you need a Nvidia card...half of the members were stating the same thing.
So you don't think in those threads it would basically force that person to get rid of the card that isn't supporting all the 'cool' features, because its very true..especially if the Game Developers is telling them basically to buy a NV card.

 

[archie4oz]

For clarity, does your expectation include consideration of the nature of these comments?

Yes... It is interesting to toy around with, however it's nowhere near the level of maturity that Cg is at. That and it only builds under Windows at moment... It also supports both OpenGL and DirectX right now which is nice. Sure ps 1.4 would be nice, however as ATi is the only vendor that builds hardware supporting it I doubt you'll ever see much support for it. GL_ATI_text_fragment_shader on the other hand would really be nice to have, but the responsability for a profile supporting it would fall to ATi for that. (on a side note, in a conversation with an ATi Mac driver developer, there was mention of an ATi fragment shader profile in the works. Of course there still needs to be a finalized Cg compiler for MacOS first...).

 

[Clashman]

In fact, it doesn't have much to do with NVidia's Cg runtime either, since NVidia provides a generic DirectX8 runtime that should run on ANY DX8 class card.

Just as an aside, it ran fine, (albeit quite slowly), on my GF SDR, so it's not neccessarily about nvidia-specific DX8 HW.

 

[Hellbinder]

Democoder, and Reverend..

It becomes ever apparent that you two will say *Anything* To brush away the real issue here. For reasons that i Feel are self evident.

*Red herring*...

Its the same things over again from our previous discussion. You cant see the Forest through the Trees. It simpley is *NOT* are we clear *NOT* about the technical merits of Cg. But the Way Nvidia Wields it. Which has been My point from the very beginging.

You keep saying the market, the market, the market. Well guess what Fellas.. The *MARKET* is controled by the *CONSUMERS*. And the *Consumers* are infuenced by *Game Companies*, and the *Hardware manufacturers*. This is simply NOT a complicated Formula. Nvidia Holds the Market Share, They have the greatest influence over Consumers AND developers.

I Find it very interesting that back when i said Nvidia would Use Cg as a tool via Public preception to favor themselves,, you openly scoffed at me. Yet now the First Hard case of what I said would happen is here. And you STILL deny it as if its not happening Right in front of your Noses..

back to the Red Herring issue....

The bottom line wether You refuse to accept it or not, is that Nvidia THEMSELVES Make the big deal out of Cg support. They are the ones that wrote the game description. They posted this game demo, and also posted it at Fileplanet. 99% of the average users Dont understand a lick about what Cg will and wont do. All they know is that it does, or does not run on their cards. All they know is that they Downloaded a Game demo From Fileplanet that Claims Cg, and DX9 as its claim to fame. But it does not run on ATi vards.. Or anyone elses cards for that matter. The connection between Cg, and needing an Nvidia card to run it *correctly* is made Automatically. which in turn gets backed up by the countless Nvidia favoring developers.. Like the ones Doomtrooper has pointed out constantly.

Do i really need to post quotes from the many people at various sites who are already stating things Like *Looks like you need an Nvidia card to run it *correctly*.. *and i hope Ati supports Cg, becuase *everyone* is going to use it*

Now what do you guys think that will acomplish? People getting pissed at Nvidia? Or Will they think that Nvidia is *cooler* and *better*. If your preception was that most game developers were going to support soemthing that will *apparently* Not run on Your card.... Its pretty damn obvious what you will do.. Buy The card that *will* do it.

Some of those in this forum have a really bad habbit of assuming that everyone in game land has the same inside, or Technical understanding to seperate The Wheat from the Chaff.

Sure this is just one small game demo.. But what are you guys going to use for your arguments in 6 moths, and 12 months.. This is only the begining.

 

[Sharkfood]

Nobody is going to go out and buy a NVIDIA video card because they discovered the game they just bought won't run on anything else.

Just had to point out that this is indeed a bit of fiction.

Quake is what originally put 3dfx on the roadmap.

Quake3 sold a ton of NVIDIA graphics cards, as did Tribes2 force hundreds and even thousands of non-NVidia owners to flock towards getting that new GTS or MX in order to play the game correctly.

If previous history is any indicator of what's to come- videogames *have* very often dictated what a consumer will buy for a videocard. Unless this trend is about to abruptly change, I dont see how one could suggest that game A running only on videocard Y wouldnt change consumer choices.

Not that some silly ported XBOX Transformers game is going to have that much impact on the market, but it's a start.