nVidia GameWorks, your thoughts

[MetroP]

Watch Dogs only using HABO was Ubisoft's choice and that choice was in no way forced by Nvidia. It would be illegal for Nvidia to some how prevent a developer from using other assets or resources. You can't blame Nvidia for laziness on the part of the developer. I can't wait for Nvidia to take AMD to court for their liable claims.

That's where you're wrong. Nvidia has a long history of strong-arming developers, bribing OEMs, threatening partners, you name it. Nvidia is known to fight dirty.

http://news.slashdot.org/story/00/07/20/189200/nvidias-ethics-questioned

It isn't very complicated. Nvidia pays a lot of money for these partnerships that's enough reason to influence a lot of things. And if Nvidia is spending money on something you better believe they're getting their money's worth.

https://twitter.com/thesamreynolds/status/472547233250803713

[Immort]

Prove it. People make those same false and libel claims all the time, yet they can never produce a single bit of proof. If what you say is true, and it's not, then Nvidia would have long ago been sued by AMD for doing so. Just like Intel was sued by AMD for doing the same thing.

How about Nvidia's former head of the The Way Its Meant To Be Played ? The reason he left was and I quote "I strongly believed in doing the right thing"

He headed Nvidia's partnership program and he's basically saying that he didn't like what was going on. It was so bad he left.

He's been with Nvidia for 10 years.

Intel is far worse than Nvidia when it comes to downright unethical business practices. They bought war-torn stolen land to build factories on for goodness sake.

[jmaster299]

How about Nvidia's former head of the The Way Its Meant To Be Played ? The reason he left was and I quote "I strongly believed in doing the right thing"

He headed Nvidia's partnership program and he's basically saying that he didn't like what was going on. It was so bad he left.

He's been with Nvidia for 10 years.

Intel is far worse than Nvidia when it comes to downright unethical business practices. They bought war-torn stolen land to build factories on for goodness sake.

Again, prove it, which you have yet to do. If Nvidia was doing as you claim, they would have been sued, end of story. But by all means, keep making excuses for why AMD sucks and is being beat by Nvidia 2 to 1 in sales of GPUs. 

[Immort]

Again, prove it, which you have yet to do. If Nvidia was doing as you claim, they would have been sued, end of story. But by all means, keep making excuses for why AMD sucks and is being beat by Nvidia 2 to 1 in sales of GPUs. 

I'm not making excuses for anybody. I'm plainly telling you the truth and you just don't like what you're hearing. You just can't accept that your company of choice often delves in unethical practices.

All you have to do is a quick google search.

Nvidia Black Lists Review Websites

Nvidia Bribing OEMs

Nvidia Execs Are Appalled, Collectively Resign

Nvidia Usurping Power with GameWorks

Former Nvidia Head of Partnerships Leaves Post, Says He believes in "Doing The Right Thing"

How Nvidia Strong Arms Partners

HardOCP goes all out on Nvidia for Strong Arming review sites.

[jmaster299]

I'm not making excuses for anybody. I'm plainly telling you the truth and you just don't like what you're hearing. You just can't accept that your company of choice often delves in unethical practices.

All you have to do is a quick google search.

http://semiaccurate.com/2010/05/30/how-nvidia-blacklists-sites-hardware-secrets/

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/10/07/nvidias-program-get-oems-like-origin-pc-dump-amd-called-tier-0/

http://wccftech.com/nvidias-senior-vp-resigns-days-top-nvidia-execs-jump-ship-amd/

www.extremetech.com/extreme/173511-nvidias-gameworks-program-usurps-power-from-developers-end-users-and-amd

https://twitter.com/amd_roy/status/471020352873967619

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4892/nvidia_s_strong_arm_tactics_how_they_treat_gpu_partners_and_media/index.html

Accusations are not proof. Show me one single case of Nvidia being fined, sued or charged for breaking the law. You can't because it's never happened because they've never broken the law. 

[Immort]

Accusations are not proof. Show me one single case of Nvidia being fined, sued or charged for breaking the law. You can't because it's never happened because they've never broken the law. 

O_O None of these are accusations. They're testimonies. I'm pretty sure you read NONE of them since you replied 4 minutes after I posted. Facts presented, bias forces you to reject them, go figure.

You also realize that you don't have to be convicted to be a criminal.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/lawsuit-claims-nvidia-hid-serious-flaw-in-graphics-chips-439

http://www.maximumpc.com/nvidia_settles_canadian_class_action_lawsuit_18_million2013

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Nvidia-engineer-fined-for-insider-trading-Santa-2526781.php

Anyway I'm done. You're situation is hopeless.

[xAcid9]

lel@fanboy.

[Falcon]

Any proprietary things must die, if possible. (With some exceptions...)

So yes, GameWorks is a very bad thing and should definitely not become common.

[papeles]

It's all about business. AMD has mantle and other small stuff. Nvidia has gameworks. None locks the other one out.

 

This is what makes this industry evolve, you guys should be happy.

Also, in case you didn't check, watch dogs run horribly on nvidia and amd. I don't even understand why so much fuss over a game made by ubisoft (i rly hate ubisoft).

[jmaster299]

O_O None of these are accusations. They're testimonies. I'm pretty sure you read NONE of them since you replied 4 minutes after I posted. Facts presented, bias forces you to reject them, go figure.

You also realize that you don't have to be convicted to be a criminal.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/security-central/lawsuit-claims-nvidia-hid-serious-flaw-in-graphics-chips-439

http://www.maximumpc.com/nvidia_settles_canadian_class_action_lawsuit_18_million2013

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Nvidia-engineer-fined-for-insider-trading-Santa-2526781.php

Anyway I'm done. You're situation is hopeless.

No, they are only accusations until they are proven. None have been proven at this point. Nvidia has disputed every claim AMD has made, and to date AMD has never been able to proven a single claim they have made. 

[Falcon]

It's all about business. AMD has mantle and other small stuff. Nvidia has gameworks. None locks the other one out.

 

nVidia says that the game devs are allowed to show the source code of their products to anybody who wants to see it. But I doubt, they are allowed to show the code of the proprietary libraries provided by GameWorks. I even doubt the game devs can view it.

nVidia has a very long history of very bad proprietary developments and is not willing to change their mind in the near future. That's why I will never buy a nVidia product. And neither should anyone else.

[jmaster299]

nVidia says that the game devs are allowed to show the source code of their products to anybody who wants to see it. But I doubt, they are allowed to show the code of the proprietary libraries provided by GameWorks. I even doubt the game devs can view it.

nVidia has a very long history of very bad proprietary developments and is not willing to change their mind in the near future. That's why I will never buy a nVidia product. And neither should anyone else.

Yeah, because no company should have use or develop their own priority technology. (heavy sarcasm, in case you failed to pick up on that) 

If you really feel that way, get off the internet and toss your computer, your TV, your cellphone, and every single thing you own in the trash. The entire planet can not and will not ever be dominated only by companies that offer free and open source products. But according to you, no one should use any product unless it's free and open source. AMD has made and uses plenty of their own proprietary technology.

GPU rendered in game physics was first developed by ATI (now AMD). It was 100% proprietary and only worked on ATI GPUs. But in ATI's infinite and boneheaded wisdom they abandoned Physics support because they could never get it right. Nvidia eventually came up with their own solution, and all AMD fanboys do is bash it for being a a "pointless" feature. In the same breath those same fanboys will then cry about the fact that Physx is proprietary, and therefore some how illegal and unfair. But if it's so "pointless" why the hell do they care so much?

There is nothing with in GameWorks that prevented Ubisoft from offering alternatives to HBAO and TXAA. Anyone who claims as such is either clueless or a liar. Nvidia has already called AMD out for lying for saying as much, and hopefully Nvidia will sue them into oblivion for it. GameWorks is nothing more than a set of tools that help developers in the creation of their games. There is nothing that stops them from using other resources in addition to GameWorks. If a developer chooses not to, that is simply the developers choice, and not any fault of Nvidia.

[Falcon]

Nvidia eventually came up with their own solution, ...

That is completely wrong. nVidia bought Ageia, who developed PhysX. nVidia hasn't changed much since then, PhysX is basically dead in terms of development.

[jmaster299]

That is completely wrong. nVidia bought Ageia, who developed PhysX. nVidia hasn't changed much since then, PhysX is basically dead in terms of development.

How is it dead. You love to make these claims, but never back them up. Every game in the Batman Arkham series has used Physx. Borderlands 2 used Physx, as will the PreSequal and Borderlands 3. Metro 2033 and Last Light use Physx, two games that are heavily optimized for AMD and favor AMD cards btw. Daylight uses Physx, CoD: Ghosts uses Physx, Assassin's Creed IV uses Physx. So, in what way is Physx development "dead"?

[Analog]

nVidia GameWorks is beyond stupid. It is down to the game developers, and the game developers only, to produce these effects in their products. As a developer it is your job to build your game. Using other tools or frameworks to build your games is fine as long as it doesn't give one set of hardware an advantage over another set of hardware, in this case it is graphics cards. If a game developer wants to implement fire physics then it is down to them, and them only, to produce that effect as it is their job, not nVidia or AMD.

 

I don't think that nVidia is forcing developers to use the tools that they have created. The developers have willingly chosen to do that. I really don't care if this technology doesn't work properly on AMD, simply because AMD did the same thing with Tomb Rider and the TressFX feature, which used to cause stuttering on nVidia cards. Same goes for Mantle and True Audio, which AMD has not made available for nVidia to implement. 

 

I guess, being left out doesn't feel good, does it AMD?!

[papeles]

nVidia says that the game devs are allowed to show the source code of their products to anybody who wants to see it. But I doubt, they are allowed to show the code of the proprietary libraries provided by GameWorks. I even doubt the game devs can view it.

nVidia has a very long history of very bad proprietary developments and is not willing to change their mind in the near future. That's why I will never buy a nVidia product. And neither should anyone else.

So, you should just put your team to develop stuff and then share it for free to the entire world.  In what reality do you live in dude? Look at apple and the phone industry. Look at microsoft . Look at all the pharmaceutical and medical companies. I could go on the entire day but i guess you got my point. 

 

How can nvidia block a company that owns a game (ubisoft) from showing it to other companies? it's all about ubisoft. If there is some business behind the scenes that's because ubisoft accepted it. It's a 2 way agreement. It has to be a win/win sittuation otherwise it wouldn't make any sense. But here, all i see is hate on nvidia.

 

Amd did mantle, wich is still not open source. Bullcrap thing makes people happy. Nvidia rejected to adopt it because soon it will be standard on direct x. Still you dont see nvidia benifiting from amd tecnologies.

 

AMD does something (tressFX, trueaudio, mantle) no1 bats an eye. nVidia does its business and the whole internet goes crazy  

It's funny tho, some games implemented such things but amd drivers are straight out trash most of the times so they don't work properly. I Still don't have video aceleration on my laptop since 13.2 drivers (hd5650) and i got a friend that gets perma black screen after those drivers.

 

All business people, all business. At the end of the day, it will make amd counter it to stay in the game, therefore contrubuting to the evolution of the industry.

[Falcon]

How is it dead. You love to make these claims, but never back them up. Every game in the Batman Arkham series has used Physx. Borderlands 2 used Physx, as will the PreSequal and Borderlands 3. Metro 2033 and Last Light use Physx, two games that are heavily optimized for AMD and favor AMD cards btw. Daylight uses Physx, CoD: Ghosts uses Physx, Assassin's Creed IV uses Physx. So, in what way is Physx development "dead"?

 

First of all, I said, the development is pretty much dead. Besides some (very) small optimizations for CPU PhysX a few years ago, nVidia hasn't changed much regarding PhysX, since the acquired Ageia.

 

Second, most of the games you mention, only use Software PhysX. They are not making use of nVidia hardware to calculate anything. Everything is done on the CPU. The only games that make use of Hardware PhysX (to my knowledge) are the Batman series, Mirror's Edge and Sacred 2.

 

 

 

So, you should just put your team to develop stuff and then share it for free to the entire world.  In what reality do you live in dude?

 

In a world where I actually make my living of developing open-source products and selling support contracts. That's how it should be done, in my opinion.

 

And, I already mentioned, there are a few examples of proprietary products/standards that open-source variants just can't compete with. That doesn't mean, that in an ideal world, they shouldn't be open-source, too.

 

Plus, there is a huge difference in software and hardware development. Software should always make use of free standards and use free standards. GameWorks is exactly what it should not look like.

[papeles]

In a world where I actually make my living of developing open-source products and selling support contracts. That's how it should be done, in my opinion.

 

And, I already mentioned, there are a few examples of proprietary products/standards that open-source variants just can't compete with. That doesn't mean, that in an ideal world, they shouldn't be open-source, too.

 

Plus, there is a huge difference in software and hardware development. Software should always make use of free standards and use free standards. GameWorks is exactly what it should not look like.

Just don't get me wrong here, I also share that pov, but that is simply not the  reality applied to the big companies. The point here is people blamming nvidia for doing something that, even if true, they are only half guity (being the other half the game companies agreeing with it). Also, AMD also does it, but no1 says shit for some reason. In the end of the day it's all business and tbh, speaking of ubisoft games specificly, you can pretty much see how retarded they have been so it doesn't even make sense to blame amd or nvidia.

[jmaster299]

First of all, I said, the development is pretty much dead. Besides some (very) small optimizations for CPU PhysX a few years ago, nVidia hasn't changed much regarding PhysX, since the acquired Ageia.

 

Second, most of the games you mention, only use Software PhysX. They are not making use of nVidia hardware to calculate anything. Everything is done on the CPU. The only games that make use of Hardware PhysX (to my knowledge) are the Batman series, Mirror's Edge and Sacred 2.

 

 

 

 

In a world where I actually make my living of developing open-source products and selling support contracts. That's how it should be done, in my opinion.

 

And, I already mentioned, there are a few examples of proprietary products/standards that open-source variants just can't compete with. That doesn't mean, that in an ideal world, they shouldn't be open-source, too.

 

Plus, there is a huge difference in software and hardware development. Software should always make use of free standards and use free standards. GameWorks is exactly what it should not look like.

No, they are all using hardware Physx. You have been absolutely clueless about every single thing you have posted so far. You are doing nothing more than guessing and assuming. Also, just because you demand that every single bit of software be open source does not mean it ever will be or should be. Companies have an absolute right to develop software technology and keep it proprietary. It's their work, no one else has any right to demand open access and use to something they had no hand in creating. Mantle is not free and open source. Tressfx is not free and open source. FreeSync is not free and open source. So climb down off your imaginary high horse already. You don't get to demand that Nvidia make everything free and open source for AMD to use to when AMD doesn't either.

[Falcon]

No, they are all using hardware Physx. You have been absolutely clueless about every single thing you have posted so far. You are doing nothing more than guessing and assuming.

 

That's pretty rude, don't you think?

 

Actually, after your post, I looked up some of the titles, and according to Wikipedia, some of them do indeed make use of hardware acceleration, so I must admit I was (partly) wrong.

 

But that doesn't mean my other points are wrong. And my opinion is just as good as yours. Companies may have the right to keep their inventions and developments proprietary. But that doesn't mean they should. At least not in this specific context, where a game should run on every card as good as possible.

 

Mantle is an open standard, not open source. That is not the same. And yes, AMD has yet to open it up for nVidia. But they claimed they would, and its likeky they do so, given their past. TressFX is already open. FreeSync is (or will probably be) part of the new DisplayPort 1.2a standard and therefore be free and open. (Manufacturers have to buy a VESA license... but they would have, too, regardless of using/integrating FreeSync or a DisplayPort, anyway.)

 

Probably I'm not the only one, who should climb down from his high horse.

[jmaster299]

That's pretty rude, don't you think?

 

Actually, after your post, I looked up some of the titles, and according to Wikipedia, some of them do indeed make use of hardware acceleration, so I must admit I was (partly) wrong.

 

But that doesn't mean my other points are wrong. And my opinion is just as good as yours. Companies may have the right to keep their inventions and developments proprietary. But that doesn't mean they should. At least not in this specific context, where a game should run on every card as good as possible.

 

Mantle is an open standard, not open source. That is not the same. And yes, AMD has yet to open it up for nVidia. But they claimed they would, and its likeky they do so, given their past. TressFX is already open. FreeSync is (or will probably be) part of the new DisplayPort 1.2a standard and therefore be free and open. (Manufacturers have to buy a VESA license... but they would have, too, regardless of using/integrating FreeSync or a DisplayPort, anyway.)

 

Probably I'm not the only one, who should climb down from his high horse.

That's not "some" of the titles I listed I listed. Every single game I listed is also listed there, except COD:Ghost, but that's an error on the part of wikipedia. COD:Ghost absolutely used GPU hardware Physx. Even if you want to go by that list, which is incomplete, it lists 43 of 55 games that support hardware Physx. Way more than the "some games" that you like falsely claimed.

Companies not having to make their software open source is not a matter of opinion. It's a fact that they do not have and a fact that they should never be forced to or expected to. Companies spend millions upon millions of dollars developing software, but you think they should be forced to give away that work for free. The world is not built that way.

Freesync still requires AMD's Freesync program to work. It will work natively with displayport 1.2a, but your GPU still has to have AMD's Freesync software installed. Plugging a Nvidia GPU into a displayport 1.2a monitor with a displayport 1.2a cable, will not give you Freesync. Tressfx is not open, or else it would have worked on Nvidia cards for Tomb Raider, which it didn't.

Nothing you posted so far has been true. Not one single thing.

 

[Falcon]

Tressfx is not open, or else it would have worked on Nvidia cards for Tomb Raider, which it didn't.

Nothing you posted so far has been true. Not one single thing.

 

Everything I said is true (except the what-games-use-hardware-acceleration thing, I already admitted that) what I said. You saying I am wrong, doesn't make it wrong automatically. Especially regarding those parts that are only your/my opinion.

 

TressFX is open. nVidia not adopting it, is totally another story.

 

Feel free to think what you like, I said everything regarding that topic and therefore I don't see any reason to further discuss that with you.

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

That is completely wrong. nVidia bought Ageia, who developed PhysX. nVidia hasn't changed much since then, PhysX is basically dead in terms of development.

how do you know, maybe it will be even more optimized for developers to deliver even better games effects !

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

People always like to throw in Mantle in their comparisons. A few months back it was Mantle vs G-Sync now it's Mantle vs GameWorks.

The fact is they're incomparable.

 

And actually unlike GameWorks all the AMD "features" posted above are totally public so Nvidia can actually work to optimize the code for it. Now imagine if the code was actually not available to Nvidia. Now is that a world you want to live in ? where the competition is at a 50%+ disadvantage and can't do anything about it ? That's what a GameWorks future looks like.

 

who ever compared mantel with G-Sync ?! it's tow different stuff, Mantle VS GameWorks yes, AMD just chickened out i'm telling, if they where balled enough, they would of went in there and say optimized mantel even better to not just deliver better performance, but better visual quality as well ! instead they just stand there harping about it waiting for developers to quit using it, BS, that's why i like nVidia, is they always can keep competitive, just wait till they reveal the new 700Series Dual GPU card that will compete with the 295x2, they never back off and freak out like AMD is doing, and AMD features, and i'm talking about the big ones such as Mantle, isn't open for nVidia to use, they said it will be, but it isn't

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

If gameworks is about improving the game's graphics then why does watch dogs look like shit and run even shittier ?

because the game is still under development first, and second, developers had to mess with GameWorks rendering to try in Give AMD Card to deliver competitive Performance since the Rendering is done by and nVidia Feature and they Fucked it up