SSAA Request aftermath thread: Post your views here

[spine]

I'm starting this thread as a continuation of "The Official "We want Super-Sampling Anti-Aliasing" thread. Read if you want to help" thread since there are a few things I (and I'm sure many others) would like to add. This is not strictly a rant and not a knee jerk reaction of the original thread being closed, which I agree was a good decision which ultimately maintained it's integrity.
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthre...eadid=33732365


Firstly, thanks to Catalyst Maker for coming into the thread and responding at all. He doesn't have to do this, and it's nice for members of ATI staff to show interest.


However, having said that;

I do find it really annoying that ATI seems to play down so easily all the interest that so many people have clearly shown.

Originally posted by CATALYST maker
...It is not as beneficial as you may have been led to believe. It will not significantly increase game experience, most games will not benefit from it, and the amount of driver work required to do this simply can not be justified...

I think WE will be the judge of whether or not it will increase our experience. We know that it'll totally elimate aliasing on alpha textures and while it's a slower method, some of us (well, ALOT of us actually) wouldn't mind having the option to make that decision ourselves. Now obviously members of the Catalyst team know alot more about it's 'ins and outs' than I do, but I find it hard to believe that it's so radically hard to implement when they've had no problem doing it for a far less popular platform, i.e. the Mac OS.

Contrary to what Spyre said (no offence intended here), the thread is not a shining example of ATI's feedback system in action, quite the opposite I'd say. ATI clearly have their own plans for what they will do with the Catalyst suite, and despite being swamped with requests for a new feature, they make it quite clear they have no intention to follow it at all.

If ATI wanna go off and do what they think is best, then fine! Really! I'm totally OK with that. If they wanna keep a few surprises and give us what they think is best, then yeah, if that's your policy, that's cool! But please don't just give us, the customers, the illusion that you listen and take onboard our requests, because you've shown that you will not make any concessions for us. I can't remember a time, ever, that such a feature has been actively rallied for by so many people via ATI's feedback system. If this request gets ignored, then what about all the other ideas people have sent in?



Bottom line ATI:

If you don't want to add features that we request, then Don't have a "feature request" option on your feedback form!

[spyre]

Hmmm, I'd just like to point out its a feature REQUEST not a feature IMPLEMENT THIS OR ELSE WE BURN DOWN YOUR HEADQUARTERS part of the feedback form

If its within their powers / time / budget / and would benefit a great number games / apps then they will implement it

Take the extra windows taskbar for dual monitors (which can be done via Ultramon util as of now, very nice util btw)

That feature was requested, its relatively easy to do so it will most likely be done in a future driver (source ATI chat on IRC)

Its a quick win and a nice bonus to 2 monitor setups, longer term projects take up far more resource and have to have greater justification

As CM said, wait and see whats coming down the pipe instead

[Dem2k]

Well im as dissapointed as the next Joe. But its ATI's call, history will tell if it was a bad move or not. I just hope these features Catmaker was on about is actually something worthwhile. Hey Smartshaders are nice, but not needed for the majority of users IMHO.

At one stage I thought it would be very bad for ATI to say no to all those request. But i guess in the end its the topdog who makes the move.

[Gandalfthewhite]

IT WOULD TAKE 6 MONTHS to make it even theoreaticlly practical i dobt anyone wants them to drop what their working on (whicih is what they would have to do) and make SSAA avaliable the money and the time necessity make it a feature that will not see the light of day

[jamesclarke555]

TBH, I found CM's response on SSAA an insult. Fair enough if at the moment they are working on something else, but he may as well have said we're never getting this feature so keep dreaming! In any case the last time a driver release/feature was hyped up, it turned out to be utter crap:

SmartShader = The most pointless feature in a driver ever.
VPU Recover = Causes as many problems than it fixes, if not more.
OverDrive = "Wow, I got 7MHz more outta my XT card and it doesn't even alter my memory"

Why not increment a feature that's worthwhile and one that has been requested by many ATi customers. And the excuse that it will cost too much and take too much time is a joke right? Hello, it's your job! And then you've got to ask yourself, why would a feature that is too expensive and time consuming show up in a Mac driver? mmm, great gaming platform the Mac

[Draco [BDS]]

I dont mean to come off as a jerk here and quite frankly I could care less about SSAA.... however it occurs to me that many of ATI's previous products used SSAA. Would it be that hard to convert the code to the 9x00 series driver?

[spyre]

Yes it would, they use different VPU cores and work differently

[Exxtreme]

Hmmm, i can understand that the implementation of ssaa will cost manpower, resources etc. and only some games will benefit from it. On the other hand, i'm slightly dissapointed that ATi ignores the requests from the community. It looks like the feature request section in the catalyst feedback programm is not really useful.

I hope, the new features in the Cat4.x will be really good and not only a handful of additional smartshader effects.

[spine]

Originally posted by jamesclarke555
TBH, I found CM's response on SSAA an insult. Fair enough if at the moment they are working on something else, but he may as well have said we're never getting this feature so keep dreaming! In any case the last time a driver release/feature was hyped up, it turned out to be utter crap:

SmartShader = The most pointless feature in a driver ever.
VPU Recover = Causes as many problems than it fixes, if not more.
OverDrive = "Wow, I got 7MHz more outta my XT card and it doesn't even alter my memory"

Why not increment a feature that's worthwhile and one that has been requested by many ATi customers. And the excuse that it will cost too much and take too much time is a joke right? Hello, it's your job! And then you've got to ask yourself, why would a feature that is too expensive and time consuming show up in a Mac driver? mmm, great gaming platform the Mac

Exactly! It's not just the fact that ATI chose to ignore the request, it's more they way it was just pushed aside like they couldn't give a sh*t. That's why it's so annoying. Maybe Catalyst Maker isn't the most adept person at expressing himself, but the way he came off in that other thread was insulting. 'Oh! I wondered where all these pathetic and poinltess requests were coming from. Now I know it was you stinky lot I'll stop caring'. And yeah, given ATI's track record of amazing features as pointed out above, I'm not holding my hopes out for anything better than SSAA or Digital Vibrance.


Maybe if we're really lucky they'll add the amazing 'feature' of having their own profiles system work!


Yeah yeah, I know, 'don't bite the horse the feeds you'. But admit it, you did want to kill Grandma this xmas when she gave you $10 worth of socks that you 'really wanted' instead of just cash which you did actually want.

[SteelWill]

What ATI has done my indeed be criminal if they did advertize SSAA and are not delivering. I'm not saying this is worth a class-action lawsuit over, but if this is ATI's attitude, ignoring customer requests and continuing along with pushing worthless gimmicks over useful advertized features then I doubt it will take a class-action to make them aware that customers don't appreciate that kind of crap.

[X*Devourer*X]

Originally posted by SteelWill
What ATI has done my indeed be criminal if they did advertize SSAA and are not delivering. I'm not saying this is worth a class-action lawsuit over, but if this is ATI's attitude, ignoring customer requests and continuing along with pushing worthless gimmicks over useful advertized features then I doubt it will take a class-action to make them aware that customers don't appreciate that kind of crap.

Very good point. If my 9700np is advertised as having the ability to do SSAA but its never actually had the option to do so in any driver release then this is false advertising. If its in the core & advertised then it should be there & the option of the buyer to use it or not. Not God almighty ATI's decision to not implement it do to the fact that it would more then likely lower benchmark test scores.

The useless feature (smart shader) however long it took them to develop this was a gross waste of time, money, effort, & an insult to the people who buy ATI video cards.

Bottom line is. If our v-cards are advertised to have certain options then these options are the duty of the manufacturer to deliver what said product boasts its capabilities.

[Dem2k]

Originally posted by gandalfthewhite
IT WOULD TAKE 6 MONTHS to make it even theoreaticlly practical i dobt anyone wants them to drop what their working on (whicih is what they would have to do) and make SSAA avaliable the money and the time necessity make it a feature that will not see the light of day

I wonder how long it took the MAC driver team to implent it.

[Flinch]

Without starting a flame war, if we are the ones that buy the cards/paying for ATI's workers wages, then isn't it more about US choosing what we want for options-vs-being told what we can and can't not have? if so, the it appears to me that having a request line is pointless.

[MuffinMan]

I'm not too bothered by SSAA and it's absence in the Catalyst drivers.

I did add my 'vote' as requested in the now locked thread, but I did it because I knew others wanted it.

I had no doubts whatsoever that the request would be turned down. It's just not important enough, and in reality I would prefer them to work on improving overall driver quality and specifically the OpenGL elements, than implementing more new features. But again, as I said, I realise that such an option would make some people happy.


To be perfectly honest, if there was one feature I would love to have in the Catalyst drivers, it would have to be "True AF". When I choose 8xAnsio I want to have 8xAnsio, not 8xAnsio on 'convenient' surfaces and 2xAnsio on ones that aren't quite so convenient.

That said, I know it will never make it into the drivers because the performance hit using AF would bring Radeons way down below comprable Nvidia cards. Image quality is important, but clearly not that important


Coming back to the AA situation. What I find amusing (sorry, but I do) is that at the same time as there's something like a 'petition' to include other forms of AA, the latest Calalyst releases seem to have gone out of their way to stop normal AA working in more and more games

[evilchickenking]

why doesn't someone make a petition and send it to the guys above the driver team? seeing as how the feature request only goes to the driver team. in other words, try to go above them.

[MuffinMan]

evilchickenking,

To be honest, I think CatMaker gave very good reasons of why ATI will not look into implementing SSAA. And I'm sure that the 'powers' above the driver team are fully aware of what features are to be added or not and for what reasons.

I would guess that a petition wouldn't do a lot of good, except for the possibility of stirring the emotions of thousands (as word of these petitions tends to spread around) of less technical ATI owners who'll probably somehow think that they are missing a vital element in the driver that hinders their everyday usage.

[evilchickenking]

Originally posted by MuffinMan
evilchickenking,

To be honest, I think CatMaker gave very good reasons of why ATI will not look into implementing SSAA. And I'm sure that the 'powers' above the driver team are fully aware of what features are to be added or not and for what reasons.

I would guess that a petition wouldn't do a lot of good, except for the possibility of stirring the emotions of thousands (as word of these petitions tends to spread around) of less technical ATI owners who'll probably somehow think that they are missing a vital element in the driver that hinders their everyday usage.

that all depends on if they even bothered to show the requests to the executives seeing as how it was already shot down in a cost analysis. so a petition could get things done. also im sure getting the job done won't hurt their cost margins...

[X*Devourer*X]

Originally posted by MuffinMan
evilchickenking,

To be honest, I think CatMaker gave very good reasons of why ATI will not look into implementing SSAA. And I'm sure that the 'powers' above the driver team are fully aware of what features are to be added or not and for what reasons.

I would guess that a petition wouldn't do a lot of good, except for the possibility of stirring the emotions of thousands (as word of these petitions tends to spread around) of less technical ATI owners who'll probably somehow think that they are missing a vital element in the driver that hinders their everyday usage.

But as I said before. If this is an advertised feature then they really have no choice in the matter & just because they would rahter not mess with it now doesn't mean every1 that owns a ATI card with this capability should just roll over & say. (Ok ATI! We bow to you're every word) If ATI is using SSAA as a selling feature & now there stance is (give it up, we are not adding it) sadly I think action needs to be taken. Don't promise things that hardware was built to do then say (go f*ck your selves, we are busy with making profits)

[evilchickenking]

Originally posted by X*Devourer*X
But as I said before. If this is an advertised feature then they really have no choice in the matter & just because they would rahter not mess with it now doesn't mean every1 that owns a ATI card with this capability should just roll over & say. (Ok ATI! We bow to you're every word) If ATI is using SSAA as a selling feature & now there stance is (give it up, we are not adding it) sadly I think action needs to be taken. Don't promise things that hardware was built to do then say (go f*ck your selves, we are busy with making profits)

class action?

[X*Devourer*X]

Originally posted by evilchickenking
class action?

I guess whatever it takes. Other wise this is something I would expect from Nvidia as of late.

[fairuza]

i like how ati says wait til you see what we have coming.

well the wtf does that mean? are you saying you are going to provide us a way to play older games like the longest journey and grim fandango with some form of AA? because if the answer is "no" then YOU ARE COMPLETELY MISSING THE POINT.

we don't care what OTHER features you have coming, we care about the one we ASKED for and that was promised to us.

so will a new AA solution be provided? yes or no.

and why lie and promise ssaa and then never implement it into drivers? gee, i wonder if i'll ever buy another ati card again.

i say we start a feedback thread to have the feedback form removed. it is useless. what is really going on is the following: anytime ati is working on a bug fix or feature and then people ask for it, they then claim that they listened to the customers. but it's apparent they really don't care.

i've seen threads bigger than the ssaa one here over is the avs forum where everyone (including me again!) requested proper HDTV adapter support (again something they promised and even sell a 40 dollar component adapter) and ati ignored that too.

conclusion: ati doesn't care about you and is not in touch with it's customer base (unless you are a 12yo first person only gamer).

[madman2k]

Originally posted by spyre
Yes it would, they use different VPU cores and work differently

no, it wouldnt:

the R300 Core is very similar to the R200 Core, because it is based on it.
Actually the R300 can be looked at, as a bugfixed and Shader extended Version of the R200.
(PS1.4 are very familar to PS 2.0, the R200 was planned to have MSAA)
Therfore ,I think, they shoud mostly be able to Copy&Paste - either from the R200 Code or from the MAC Drivers (at least the OpenGL part)

I think the main reason, why they dont do it is becaouse it would cause more support reqests and perhaps disturbe some dummies (I think Super is better than Multi - but why are all my Games so jerky? f*** Ati!)
But I think everyone would be contended if the driver wold just support it and we could enable it through third-party-tools.
So if you feel like wasting your time next time, forget about SmartShader Effects, implement SSAA and give some anonymous hint, that it is ready...

[Synchro]

Originally posted by Flinch
Without starting a flame war, if we are the ones that buy the cards/paying for ATI's workers wages, then isn't it more about US choosing what we want for options-vs-being told what we can and can't not have? if so, the it appears to me that having a request line is pointless.

Actually, we aren't. At least, I'm not at this moment. I already bought my AIW 9800 Pro, and do not pay for any sort of continuing service through ATi. That's the problem here - we who have already bought their products are no longer paying their wages (we already did that). Those who are buying new products today, and those that will purchase tomorrow are the ones who keep the workers at ATi employed. This is why so many businesses worldwide ignore their past customers in favor of attracting new ones... It is *far* simpler to gain a new customer through flashy advertising and vague promises than to keep a relationship with a past one.

Never expect anything more from any company, and you'll understand their position better. I don't agree with it, and I don't like it, but that is how corporations operate. The only real way to avoid this headache, is to build company/client relationships with small businesses who can't afford to piss off their established userbase. Unfortunately, those companies don't work in the semiconductor field, since advanced electronics is wayyyyyy out of the cost range for anything less than a large company to deal with (we're talking development, not repackaging ie. BFG, MSI, ASUS, etc.).

So in short: Past customers aren't what makes the business world go 'round anymore. We have already received what we have paid for in the eyes of corporate dogma, and until we pony up more money for new product, they don't *owe* us anything. While they would *like* us to continue buying their products, they aren't willing to invest too much of their money (it's always money, even if they say it's time or difficulty... the bottom line is money in one form or another) to maintain loyalty, *especially* if we are anything like I am, and only buy new product once or twice a year.

Always remember one thing - business is about screwing the customer out of as much money, for as little return that is possible.

[spyre]

@ madman2k

Well dont belive me, doesnt bother me

[black hole sun]

Originally posted by jamesclarke555
SmartShader = The most pointless feature in a driver ever.
VPU Recover = Causes as many problems than it fixes, if not more.
OverDrive = "Wow, I got 7MHz more outta my XT card and it doesn't even alter my memory"

Ok, lets keep the SPIN to a minimum please (in the words of Mr O'Reilly). OVERDRIVE increases my core clocks to 432MHz, a 21MHz total increase. Not that bad, eh? Apparently you don't know what you're talking about when you say "wow a 7MHz increase. " Secondly, VPU Recover is a very useful feature, I really don't want you mean by causing problems; it's saved thousands of computers from hard lockups. And yet, you complain because it doesn't affect you Lastly, the SmartShader project, although not very useful, was a fun little toy ATi included...it didn't cause problems and didn't cost anything to make. Dont complain about new features.

[X*Devourer*X]

Originally posted by Synchro
Actually, we aren't. At least, I'm not at this moment. I already bought my AIW 9800 Pro, and do not pay for any sort of continuing service through ATi. That's the problem here - we who have already bought their products are no longer paying their wages (we already did that). Those who are buying new products today, and those that will purchase tomorrow are the ones who keep the workers at ATi employed.

I seriously doubt ATI thinks this way & its simply just not conducive for a thriving business. We who have already bought said cards are more then likely going to be buying another 1 before we die. If ATI has a track record of promising options that they don't deliver then I can't imagine them doing well. The buyers pay the workers even after the first purchase if ATI does everything they say they can do.

[X*Devourer*X]

Originally posted by black hole sun
Ok, lets keep the SPIN to a minimum please (in the words of Mr O'Reilly). OVERDRIVE increases my core clocks to 432MHz, a 21MHz total increase.

Lets keep you're facts to real facts. Not every1 will be getting a 21 Mhz increase. Just like not every1 will get the exact same increase in over clocking any given CPU. Its subjective & entirely the luck up the draw how well any given peice of hardware OC's. If all he got was 7 Mhz more then who are you to tell him he doesn't know what he is talking about?

[jamesclarke555]

Originally posted by black hole sun
Ok, lets keep the SPIN to a minimum please (in the words of Mr O'Reilly). OVERDRIVE increases my core clocks to 432MHz, a 21MHz total increase. Not that bad, eh? Apparently you don't know what you're talking about when you say "wow a 7MHz increase. " Secondly, VPU Recover is a very useful feature, I really don't want you mean by causing problems; it's saved thousands of computers from hard lockups. And yet, you complain because it doesn't affect you Lastly, the SmartShader project, although not very useful, was a fun little toy ATi included...it didn't cause problems and didn't cost anything to make. Dont complain about new features.

STFU It's like I already said, if you like the features then great, I'm happy for you. I could care less for them.

Originally posted by Synchro
Actually, we aren't. At least, I'm not at this moment. I already bought my AIW 9800 Pro, and do not pay for any sort of continuing service through ATi. That's the problem here - we who have already bought their products are no longer paying their wages (we already did that).

Dumbass

When you buy a card, your not just paying for the silicon, your paying for continued software support thereafter! When you exchange money, what you get in return isn't always tangible.

[Sharkfood]

I think CM's reply was indeed insulting, but you can't hang the accountibility on the messenger. The ATI folks that frequent these boards are NOT the ones responsible for making decisions on driver development priorities and are therefore just conduits of information interchange. CM is just simply relaying the current policy and standpoint of ATI.

Unfortunately, the standpoint forwarded from CM is fictional. The percentages and figures given are skewed and incorrect. The feature is undermined and otherwise incorrectly portrayed.

Honestly, if ATI does not deliver SSAA on at least the 9700 series, this will be the last generation of ATI videocards that will be purchased for my own personal machines, the 50+ machines at my work, as well as the 100's per year of built systems and personal recommendations. As it stands, SSAA was used to market and gain initial sales for the 9700 Pro as it's found in there product pre-marketing campaign. From this standpoint, SSAA was a promised, yet totally undelivered feature. This is bait and switch and no business professional can reasonably suggest or recommend products that do not deliver their advertised features.

[Edit- the marketing product information can still be found at:
http://www.ati.com/vortal/r300/educational/main.html

Click on "Smoothvision 2.0" and go to the second page. The text on this page states:
"SMOOTHVISION(tm) 2.0 includes support for two forms of anti-aliasing. The first, known as super-sampling, ....."

[evilchickenking]

Originally posted by Synchro
Actually, we aren't. At least, I'm not at this moment. I already bought my AIW 9800 Pro, and do not pay for... remember one thing - business is about screwing the customer out of as much money, for as little return that is possible.

that is partly true but if they piss too many people off for too long they force the consumer to look else where for the product or service. in our case we pay for both a product and service ( card and drivers )

also they must continue to improve the drivers to keep us the consumer happy so we will buy their products again.

what better way to keep us happy than to listen to us?