what I'm saying is that it is way too early to start dropping cards that are only 2-3 years old
As I've already stated, it depends on the revenue you get if it makes sense to include a feature. It's not a matter of opinions.
How many times do I have to say this, working version for the Xbox. The Code is aviable, people have asked it to be released promsing they do it themslesvs, Its not the first time. The Battlefield 1942 Bot AI was such a pile of shit that when BF-singleplayer offered to do the damn coding themsleves they got it.
Agian the community has asked, just give us the 1.4 coding we will do it ourselves, and EA has refused.
No. The legitimate reason is that only a certain amount of people are interested in GF4 ti support. I am not, for example.
Pity cause it seems Nvidia, and most every other future engine out there does, Unreal-3, The Wake Engine, EoW engine, The Doom3 engine, The Source Engine.
What all of the next series of games will be built off of and all of them support GF4's and will probably support them for the next few years.
EA is the leader in game sales, they should be setting an example for others to follow
I don't see an ethical problem here. EA is in to make money. If a few people are angry, so what?
Few people angrey? From the "unoffical" polls on various websites which of course are unscientific. Plus posts in the various offical EA and partner websites polls I'd make a Guess that they pissed off a good 90% of the community with the move, combined with the fact they won't release the 1.4 code.
The remain five percent is made up of the 5% of people who don't care, and the 5% of Rabid fanboys tha all companys enjoy who will defend the company no matter how henious the actions.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
ggs wrote:
So? Testing costs mega $$$. The lack of testing might be worth that +60% posible market.
So? You want a game people will buy? Don't have it format their computers when they install it. Releasing a bug free game will garner you alot more dedicated fans and more sales then a half completed, then patched to completion game.
Most game publishers dont give a flying shit about dedicated fans, they cost too much money to keep happy. The casual gamer market is just so much bigger.
EA has a history and releasing hidiously buggy games, and they still seem to be doing well.
The Xbox is a fixed set of hardware. They only have to rest 1 configuration, period.
Porting the changes to the PC version just increases the number of posible configurations for the PC version.
Shader 1.4 is the only thing preventing it from running on Geforce4's and eariler, come on now.
Adding Shaders 1.4 adds considerably more testing. And any idiot can see EA games does not like doing testing.
"Okay, I'll have the truth with a side order of clarity." ~ Dr. Daniel Jackson.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." ~ Stephen Colbert
"One Drive, One Partition, the One True Path" ~ ars technica forums - warrens - on hhd partitioning schemes.
ggs wrote:
Adding Shaders 1.4 adds considerably more testing. And any idiot can see EA games does not like doing testing.
On the contrary, they just charged everyone fifty bucks to be in their Public Beta test.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Mr Bean wrote:On the contrary, they just charged everyone fifty bucks to be in their Public Beta test.
Normally testing costs EA money and considerable time. Now they get payed for someone else todo the testing and then they just need the time investment.
A Win-Win from an EA manager's POV
"Okay, I'll have the truth with a side order of clarity." ~ Dr. Daniel Jackson.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." ~ Stephen Colbert
"One Drive, One Partition, the One True Path" ~ ars technica forums - warrens - on hhd partitioning schemes.
Uhm wait, did EA release a game that will not run on systems that do not support Pixel Shaders v 2.0? If that's the case, then that's not a bug, that's just really shitty programming. It's trivial, at most, to just simply disable shaders for low-end systems. And there are also utilities that will convert PSv2.0 code into assembly language that lower PS versions will understand, if they love their shaders so much.
Well, isn't this the proverbial case of graphics getting in the way of gameplay
EA can suck shit for all I care. Fucking 75 % of the games on the shelves here are games by EA!
"Nippon ichi, bitches! Boing-boing." Mai smote the demonic fires of heck...
Okay then, so it does support 1.4? Still doesn't make any sense why they didn't just disable it for the systems where it would not work. Either all of it, or just the features not supported in the lower versions.
"Nippon ichi, bitches! Boing-boing." Mai smote the demonic fires of heck...
Okay then, so it does support 1.4? Still doesn't make any sense why they didn't just disable it for the systems where it would not work. Either all of it, or just the features not supported in the lower versions.
They made a working Shader 1.4 version for the Xbox port but refused to put it into the PC version which means Geforce4 and eariler cards can't run them game.
Well acutaly they CAN but to do it you have to hack the core files and replace a few strings, and doing that will get you Auto-banned by Punkbuster, so you can't play offline.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
BF2 is buggy as hell (90 percent of the time the fucking thing refuses to load, and/or crashes to desktop), but when you do get to play, it's damn fun.
But reading about how they treat employees, and then refusing to pay devs of BF2...that really, REALLY fucking pisses me off. BF2 is the only EA game I own, I refuse to touch anything else of theirs, and not just on ethical grounds, but technical ones as well.
Captain Tycho! The worst fucker ever!
The Best reciever ever!
And since when do OEM PCs (models which don't use on-board graphics) have DX9 cards? Since more than 2 years.
Oh you mean "Intel's Extreme Series?" That won't play BF2 either
This is on-board graphics. You cannot expect a PC like this to run any modern game.
A DX9 card which can play BF2 costs $100. Big deal.
Play AT ALL or play well?[/quote]
[/quote]
Play at all. How do you think BF2 would look like on a GF4ti?
Few people angrey? From the "unoffical" polls on various websites which of course are unscientific. Plus posts in the various offical EA and partner websites polls I'd make a Guess that they pissed off a good 90% of the community with the move, combined with the fact they won't release the 1.4 code.
The remain five percent is made up of the 5% of people who don't care, and the 5% of Rabid fanboys tha all companys enjoy who will defend the company no matter how henious the actions.
I am not able to come up with numbers, but everybody who bought BF2 I know already has a DX9 card. Nobody complains about that.
A graphics card only has a very short lifespan as a good card. You can buy a GF 7800GTX today, and probably next year the midrange cards will have about the same speed. In two years it is old. That's just how it is.
Ladies and gentlemen, I can envision the day when the brains of brilliant men can be kept alive in the bodies of dumb people.
Actualy thats NOT how it is. The fact that games like Half-Life 2, Doom 3, and Far Cry run on cards older then two years old proves this to be false. BF2 is the first big game to come out and violate this rule and saying "Thats the way it is" is nothing more then a bullshit copout.
You've yet to provide justification or logical explinations for what EA did in face of the facts of the case.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
You've yet to provide justification or logical explinations for what EA did in face of the facts of the case.
I've already stated multiple times that I guess that this case is a matter of ressorces: A software development project usually has a fixed amount of ressources, and a (more or less) fixed release date.
At some points, be it at the very biginning of the project, be it that something unexpected happens, you have to make decisions on how to spend your ressources.
EA/dice obviously decided not to support pre-pixel shader 1.4 models. The GF4ti does not have this feature, while the Radeon 8500 does. Too bad, so sad.
Let's see which future game engines support will pixel shader 1.3.
Ladies and gentlemen, I can envision the day when the brains of brilliant men can be kept alive in the bodies of dumb people.
They already had the basic elements down to support it. The resources expended to support the GeForce 4 would have been far surpassed by the profits from the gamers. The time element isn't even worth considering when you look at the mod community and realize they are on the verge of a fix. The man hours and the resources argument just doesn't float.
The "Too bad so sad" argument hurts EA because of lost sales and illwill from the community.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
BabelHuber wrote:I've already stated multiple times that I guess that this case is a matter of ressorces: A software development project usually has a fixed amount of ressources, and a (more or less) fixed release date.
At some points, be it at the very biginning of the project, be it that something unexpected happens, you have to make decisions on how to spend your ressources.
And they already spent the money to support older cards, like the Geforce3 so it will run on the X-Box. Seeing as the X-Box is running a proprietary version of windows, how fucking hard could it be to port the code over? What part of this simple concept escapes your tiny little brain?
"I once asked Rebecca to sing Happy Birthday to me during sex. That was funny, especially since I timed my thrusts to sync up with the words. And yes, it was my birthday." - Darth Wong
Leader of the SD.Net Gargoyle Clan | Spacebattles Firstone | Twitter
What part of this simple concept escapes your tiny little brain?
How often do I have to point out that adding a feature to an application means more than just the pure implementation time of the development team?
Project ressources usually are fixed, shithead. If you do one thing, you often cannot do another one. Mostly there's a trade-off involved. But perhaps this is to hard to understand for you.
Ladies and gentlemen, I can envision the day when the brains of brilliant men can be kept alive in the bodies of dumb people.
So instead of increasing project resources by a minor degree they decide to fuck over a large chunk of the gaming and therefor loose money. Real fucking smart.
I still see you have no argument. You keep repeating the same BS copouts.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
BabelHuber wrote:How often do I have to point out that adding a feature to an application means more than just the pure implementation time of the development team?
Project ressources usually are fixed, shithead. If you do one thing, you often cannot do another one. Mostly there's a trade-off involved. But perhaps this is to hard to understand for you.
Project resources fixed...on a multi-million dollar game? Are you telling me that a multi-million dollar coperation can't afford to pay employees a few more days to port the code over? Are you really THAT dense?
Concession accepted troll.
"I once asked Rebecca to sing Happy Birthday to me during sex. That was funny, especially since I timed my thrusts to sync up with the words. And yes, it was my birthday." - Darth Wong
Leader of the SD.Net Gargoyle Clan | Spacebattles Firstone | Twitter
What part of this simple concept escapes your tiny little brain?
How often do I have to point out that adding a feature to an application means more than just the pure implementation time of the development team?
Project ressources usually are fixed, shithead. If you do one thing, you often cannot do another one. Mostly there's a trade-off involved. But perhaps this is to hard to understand for you.
Then why the fuck don't they simple give it up to the community? There IS no valid reason if they don't want to spend the extra thousand dollers.
Your talking about a thousand fold return on investment to spend the money(Either the small fee Fileplanet would cost to host it, email it themselves or acutal pay few a few tens of programing hours)
and your defending the idoicy of it.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
BabelHuber wrote:How often do I have to point out that adding a feature to an application means more than just the pure implementation time of the development team?
Project ressources usually are fixed, shithead. If you do one thing, you often cannot do another one. Mostly there's a trade-off involved. But perhaps this is to hard to understand for you.
Project resources fixed...on a multi-million dollar game? Are you telling me that a multi-million dollar coperation can't afford to pay employees a few more days to port the code over? Are you really THAT dense?
Concession accepted troll.
Your the fucking moron who doesnt understand that in Software you have a limit budget, which includes time as well as money. You need time to develop a feature and test it.
And if you think adding more developers will help you need to read at least the summeries of the book Mythical Man-month
"Okay, I'll have the truth with a side order of clarity." ~ Dr. Daniel Jackson.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." ~ Stephen Colbert
"One Drive, One Partition, the One True Path" ~ ars technica forums - warrens - on hhd partitioning schemes.
This is a god damend bassic feature so the community isn't told to fuck off. We aren't talking about some minor feature that the game can do without. We are talking about rejecting part of the community for no god damned reason.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Alyeska wrote:This is a god damend bassic feature so the community isn't told to fuck off. We aren't talking about some minor feature that the game can do without. We are talking about rejecting part of the community for no god damned reason.
It is completely mindblowing that they didnt add 1.4 shader support(from a PR/marketing POV), but the reasons are completely understandable from a technological view.
And a few million really isnt that much for a modern AAA title these days. Halo 2 was some ~$10 million US, and that was only for a single platform.
"Okay, I'll have the truth with a side order of clarity." ~ Dr. Daniel Jackson.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." ~ Stephen Colbert
"One Drive, One Partition, the One True Path" ~ ars technica forums - warrens - on hhd partitioning schemes.
ggs wrote:
Your the fucking moron who doesnt understand that in Software you have a limit budget, which includes time as well as money. You need time to develop a feature and test it.
Then they could have just released an unsupported patch to allow support for sub PS 2.0 cards. This would have been a dick thing to do, but inifinitely better than telling people with these cards to fuck off.
And the budget constraint argument is laughable, if every other title on the market can do it, certainly a AAA title can.
What part of this simple concept escapes your tiny little brain?