Es wäre natürlich wünchenswert, wenn man ernsthaft und mit einer gewissen Bereitschaft auf meine Beiträge eingeht. Fanboy-Kategorisierung und Verschwörungsunterstellungen gehören jedenfall nicht zu diesen konstruktiven Reaktionen.
"With that admittedly verbose background out of the way, let's dig into
Watch Dogs specifically. I've been testing it over the weekend on a variety of newer AMD and Nvidia graphics cards, and the results have been simultaneously fascinating and frustrating. It's evident that
Watch Dogs is optimized for Nvidia hardware, but it's staggering just how
un-optimized it is on AMD hardware. I guarantee that when the game gets released, a swarm of upset gamers are going to point fingers at AMD for the sub-par performance. Their anger would be misplaced."
Sehr sachlich beschrieben. Auch die Reaktionen von AMD sind sehr sachlich. Der Begriff Sabotage ist natürlich hart. Es ist hier jedoch eine
bewusste Benachteiligung deutlich zu sehen.
aus:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasone...-the-entire-pc-gaming-ecosystem/#5ceca4913ca2
Hier noch ein interessantes Statement eines Indie-Entwicklers:
"Okay, I just want to be 100% clear here:
1) I’ve done a little bit of indie game development work. What AMD claims is mostly truthful. The vast majority of Nvidia’s libraries are very proprietary and it is in the EULA that the code – even if source licensed to the dev – cannot be viewed with anyone not specifically listed within that licensing agreement (this isn’t entirely unusual). 2) The last time I worked with Nvidia specific C libraries, they all opened with a driver and manufacturer function check, complete with specific code routes to follow when Nvidia hardware is detected, allowing ‘optimized’ portions of code to ONLY be performed on Nvidia hardware (some portions of their DX libraries will actually perform a GPU firmware check on initialize). While the code itself doesn’t specifically preclude any particular hardware, it does allow things to happen on Nvidia hardware that are not allowed to happen on any other. This is a really crappy thing to do, since the only real differences at the most base level between these competitors are the architectural arrangements of their particular SIMD engines which are all using the same exact hardware functions (no, there is no such F***ing thing as ‘Hardware based’ PhysX; it has NEVER existed and can never exist; any decent engineer would guffaw at the idea). 3) AMD’s code is open source and readily available on their dev portals. What we always liked about this is that, more often than not, you could just sign up (for free) login, post your code in their dev forums and someone from AMD would take the time to look at it and offer suggestions… 100% free of charge. I’ll give AMD this much, at the very least: They do seem to try to foster a very friendly development environment. Them and Crytek (I can’t tell you the number of times I ended up in PM conversations with some of the guys at Crytek optimizing animations, textures and code) and all without ever paying a single, red cent.
Given the choice, I will always pick AMD’s dev environments and products because, as both a customer and someone who likes developing just for the shiggles of it, they offer an environment that makes you feel like you belong and your opinions/wants/desires/work matters.
Nvidia, on the other hand, always seemed to have one more thing they could offer (than what precious little you already got; and believe me, it IS very little)… as long as we had the money to pay a premium. And indie developers do not have that luxury. So, no. I will never work with gameworks and will continue to generally avoid titles that incorporate it. It’s a really crappy way to do business."
