Is there more to it than TWIMTBP? (Personal commentary)

[Spicedaddy]

TWIMTBP is just marketing.

nVidia could easily give support to devs without requiring them to slap their logo all over the games, but they don't because it's a good marketing opportunity for them.


Standard DirectX code for standard DirectX hardware, that's the REAL way it's meant to be played.

 

[Keysplayr]

TWIMTBP is just marketing.

nVidia could easily give support to devs without requiring them to slap their logo all over the games, but they don't because it's a good marketing opportunity for them.


Standard DirectX code for standard DirectX hardware, that's the REAL way it's meant to be played.

Incorrect. It isn't just marketing. The only marketing aspect of it, is to let people know that NV went an extra mile. And there isn't anything wrong with touting such a practice.
Correct, Nvidia "could" give the same support without the logo on the game. But why should they? You're treating it like a burden on yourself. Don't fret.

And your "standard DirectX code" doesn't make any sense. It's all DX. Except when it's OGL.

 

[evolucion8]

Review from Anandtech
Without AA, 5870 have 102 FPS, 196 under CF. Nvidia 285 have 85 FPS, 160 under SLI.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...iew/page14.asp
Even with 4xFSAA 5870 have 78.4 FPS, Nvidia 285 have 75.1

Now you can crossover the performance variation against this different games to see if there is something fishy about the performance. As to the MSAA part, you can find it in this thread.

FSAA works fine for both vendors, as you can see the FPS is very playable and the quality may even be better than MSAA. However, MSAA through UE3 engine was coded, QAed and licensed by Nvidia, for Nvidia user. It is true that there is a performance difference between FSAA and MSAA, the exact same code developed by Nvidia does appear to work on ATI hardware too, and a few ATI users are upset about it being exclusive to Nvidia users. ATI claims they are working on their version of MSAA with Eidos, but no promise that they will deliver.

What really got blocked is the cross vendor setup, where a user use a ATI card as primary display while having a cheap Nvidia to do PhysX. Nvidia released a new driver that prevent such setup to enable PhysX.

Everytime that you post something, makes less sense. The BAA Anti Aliasing option in the control panel doesn't work when an ATi card is used, period. The only way to make it work is cheating it using the DeviceD trick with ATi Tray Tool, what does that tell you? If it isn't locked? What is? When you force the anti aliasing setting with ATi's CCC, it will use FSAA which is less efficient than the selective FSAA used with nVidia. So is an apples to oranges comparison. The game runs almost identical with both vendors, because the game isn't taxing enough to expose the additional capabilities and raw power of the HD 5870, even the GTS 250 performs 8fps behind of the GTX 260+.

Incorrect. It isn't just marketing. The only marketing aspect of it, is to let people know that NV went an extra mile. And there isn't anything wrong with touting such a practice.
Correct, Nvidia "could" give the same support without the logo on the game. But why should they? You're treating it like a burden on yourself. Don't fret.

And your "standard DirectX code" doesn't make any sense. It's all DX. Except when it's OGL.

There's games that uses driver calls through the NVAPI in DX games. So it isn't adhering to DirectX standards, because if some day, that feature is taken away from the driver, that feature won't work at all. Adhering to DirectX standard closely will guarantee that you can play the same game 5 years later and it will still working with no issues. Far Cry 2 uses NVAPI for Anti Aliasing improvements because of the lack of DX10.1. It isn't bad, but it is propietary and isn't adhering to Microsoft DirectX standards.

 

[Keysplayr]

Everytime that you post something, makes less sense. The BAA Anti Aliasing option in the control panel doesn't work when an ATi card is used, period. The only way to make it work is cheating it using the DeviceD trick with ATi Tray Tool, what does that tell you? If it isn't locked? What is? When you force the anti aliasing setting with ATi's CCC, it will use FSAA which is less efficient than the selective FSAA used with nVidia. So is an apples to oranges comparison. The game runs almost identical with both vendors, because the game isn't taxing enough to expose the additional capabilities and raw power of the HD 5870, even the GTS 250 performs 8fps behind of the GTX 260+.



There's games that uses driver calls through the NVAPI in DX games. So it isn't adhering to DirectX standards, because if some day, that feature is taken away from the driver, that feature won't work at all. Adhering to DirectX standard closely will guarantee that you can play the same game 5 years later and it will still working with no issues. Far Cry 2 uses NVAPI for Anti Aliasing improvements because of the lack of DX10.1. It isn't bad, but it is propietary and isn't adhering to Microsoft DirectX standards.

If it isn't bad, then there isn't anything to worry about. As long as it works properly.

 

[Creig]

Batman:AA Antialiasing. This was something of a smear campaign against Nvidia. It was a perfect opportunity to call foul and create the illusion of foul play on Nvidias part.

Nvidia the victim of a smear campaign from ATi? If it were true, I would simply call that ironic justice. But the truth is, Nvidia is the one who brought this down upon themselves with the MSAA lockout. In fact, it was very reminiscent of the fallout they received from the PhysX lockout. Nvidia has nobody to blame but themselves for making poor marketing decisions like this.

I have spoken with the team who actually worked on Batman and added the AA content.
While they were working on it, they weren't considering that fact that they would be severely attacked publicly for it. They just added their code. Tested that code on all their hardware with the dev. They put the ID check there because they knew it would work fine on their hardware. NOT to prevent ATI hardware from using it. There was simply an "IF THEN" algorithm. IF ID = Nvidia, THEN run the code. IF ID = OTHER, Use standard game config.

So, this blew up beyond imagination. Nvidia was trying to make something better, despite the belief's and smear campaign that was slung.

Just how do you equate general public outrage = smear campaign? Many people were unhappy with the decision and made sure that Nvidia/Rocksteady/Eidos heard about. That's what happens when management makes decisions like this.

AMD's smear campaign is vast. They have really amped things up over the last year or so.
It's good for their business to show NV is the worst possible light. I'm pretty much speaking to the neutral folks in here. Not to those who will spend much of their time arguing what I posted here, calling it lies, PR, Marketing, BS.

You're talking about AMD's smear campaign while being sponsored by Nvidia? Nvidia's smear campaign is 100X greater than ATi could ever hope to aspire to. Heck, all you need to do is look at your good buddy and fellow Nvidia Focus Group member, Rollo. He's put out more anti-ATI smear all by himself than any AMD organized group could ever manage to propagate.

Do you have any examples of this "vast" AMD smear campaign?

What I posted here was my knowledge acquired after speaking directly with the TWIMTBP team. There was no intention to "BLOCK" features in Batman:AA. Only to "ENABLE" features with and Nvidia card ID check to run their AA code. It is VERY easy, to confuse these.
Like saying the glass is half full, or half empty.

Keys, if a feature is added to a game that works just as well on ATi cards as on Nvidia cards, and then a Vendor_ID check is added to allow it to run on only the Nvidia cards... That's called a "BLOCK".

I hope this clears some things up. Some misconceptions. It's a great program and untold amounts of man hours and effort goes into it. It's an initiative by NV to make sure things work the best they can for gamers.

I see. So locking out MSAA from Batman was making sure things work the best they can for gamers. Locking out PhysX from working on any computer that has an ATI GPU in it was making sure things work the best they can for gamers.

It's good to know that Nvidia is so concerned with looking out for us gamers.

 

[Seero]

Just how do you equate general public outrage = smear campaign? Many people were unhappy with the decision and made sure that Nvidia/Rocksteady/Eidos heard about. That's what happens when management makes decisions like this.

There is no public outrage, only a few people misleaded by ATI's PR speeches along with some die hard fans. Other then them, those who played batman AA are happy. There are ATI user who stick with FSAA, or enable MSAA by "modding" the game. What is interesting from these people is, it appears ATI to be completely innocent, and trying their best by not doing anything extra to help their customer. Yet Nvidia being bad for adding something exclusively to their customer. Yes we can argue all day long, but the game is getting old and ATI still fail to deliver their version of the code.

Keys, if a feature is added to a game that works just as well on ATi cards as on Nvidia cards, and then a Vendor_ID check is added to allow it to run on only the Nvidia cards... That's called a "BLOCK".


I see. So locking out MSAA from Batman was making sure things work the best they can for gamers. Locking out PhysX from working on any computer that has an ATI GPU in it was making sure things work the best they can for gamers.

It's good to know that Nvidia is so concerned with looking out for us gamers.

Yes you can't drive my car even though you claim you are capable of driving, and no, I didn't "BLOCK" you from going anywhere, just not with my car.

Yes ATI can't use Nvidia's code even though they claim it works for them, and no, Nvidia didn't "BLOCK" ATI from enabling MSAA in batman AA, just not with Nvidia's code.

Yes you can't use the feature exclusively designed and QAed on a few Nvidia's hardware. Only that selected few video cards can use it. Not all Nvidia use can use MSAA in Batman AA, and ATI have not done nothing for ATI users. If you think ATI does nothing while Nvidia is being good to some of their customers, then yeah. If you don't wanna jump ship because the ticket is more expensive, you can wait.

Richard Hubby said:

We're currently working with Eidos and we want that to be in there in a future update. That's not a commitment to it, but we are working with Eidos to make it happen because I believe it's in every consumer’s interest.

The PhysX part is arguable. Using an ATI card as a primary display card while having a cheap Nvidia card as a secondary card that handles PhysX really isn't a setup Nvidia intended to have. Nvidia really don't want to be responsible for any hardware damage on your ATI card while running PhysX, and/or crashes due to your ATI card while running PhysX. Can there be another reason for it? Yes, Nvidia really don't work their video card to be used as a PhysX calculator only. Did it fried your ATI card? No. Did it cause instability in your system? No. Did it do anything that hammers your ATI card's performance? No. You may say that you Nvidia card don't work well with ATI card. If you really have a problem with this, ask Richard why ATI cards can't crossfire with Nvidia cards.

 

[waffleironhead]

I'd like to hear from each of you what exactly you think TWIMTBP is. Try to keep the condescention out of it though. No fanboy stuff. Just basic stuff. Then I'll explain about what it actually is. I'm only asking for this because I see a lot of people hear talking about it as if they know, without a doubt, what it is. So, enough is enough. I'll address each comment individually, whether it's accurate, or innacurate.
-Thanks.

I wondered when you'd start trying to earn your fermi. :\

 

[Attic]

What nVidia did with Physx and Batman AA is wrong. It doesn't need to be dressed up as something it is or isn't, it's just wrong. It's simple, gamers know this, nVidia's PR knows this.

The arguement that systems using ATI as primary graphics are locked out of using Phyx because of QA is so full of holes it's laughable. Not so much laughable as idiotic. nVidia did not make that decision because of QA assurance reasons, they did it for monetary reasons and to try and lock users into having to buy nVidia as primary GPUS instead of losing market share to users buying New ATI GPU's and using their old nVdia GPU for Physx.

THis shit the nVidia camp comes up with to defend what is easily identifiable as wrong is preposterous. Give up, nobody is going along with your shtick.

 

[Creig]

There is no public outrage, only a few people misleaded by ATI's PR speeches along with some die hard fans.

Then do me a favor and trying Googling the words "Batman AA ATi" and review the comments left by people.

so stupid that nvidia did this...... and this is coming from someone with nvidia cards!

I have both ATI and NV based systems and tried this on my Radeon 4870 and found that it worked.

Really terrible of NV to use a game developer this way IMHO.

Whats next they take out Texture Maps if its not running on a Nvidia Card.

What a joke.

Nvfail again.

Seems like they do that alot lately

Crysis déjà vu...

NVidia hardware isn't bad, the same thing can't be said about their so called marketing strategies.

I could go on, but I think you get the point.

That's called "public outrage".

Other then them, those who played batman AA are happy. There are ATI user who stick with FSAA, or enable MSAA by "modding" the game. What is interesting from these people is, it appears ATI to be completely innocent, and trying their best by not doing anything extra to help their customer. Yet Nvidia being bad for adding something exclusively to their customer. Yes we can argue all day long, but the game is getting old and ATI still fail to deliver their version of the code.

ATi shouldn't have to "deliver" anything. Nvidia is the one that should allow Rocksteady/Eidos to remove the vendor ID lockout:

it turns out that the code that was labeled "MSAA Trademark NVIDIA Corporation" was identical to the one recommended by both sides with one very important difference: nVidia's code features a Vendor ID lock that allows for AA menu inside the game only if nVidia hardware is detected.

Yet ATi isn't locking Nvidia out of DX11 content that they're assisting developers with.

Nvidia really needs to learn how to place nice with others.

Yes you can't drive my car even though you claim you are capable of driving, and no, I didn't "BLOCK" you from going anywhere, just not with my car. Yes ATI can't use Nvidia's code even though they claim it works for them, and no, Nvidia didn't "BLOCK" ATI from enabling MSAA in batman AA, just not with Nvidia's code.

*sigh*

it turns out that the code that was labeled "MSAA Trademark NVIDIA Corporation" was identical to the one recommended by both sides with one very important difference: nVidia's code features a Vendor ID lock that allows for AA menu inside the game only if nVidia hardware is detected.

Yes you can't use the feature exclusively designed and QAed on a few Nvidia's hardware. Only that selected few video cards can use it. Not all Nvidia use can use MSAA in Batman AA, and ATI have not done nothing for ATI users. If you think ATI does nothing while Nvidia is being good to some of their customers, then yeah. If you don't wanna jump ship because the ticket is more expensive, you can wait.

Then why has ATi repeatedly stated that they will not lock DX11 effects to ATi cards on titles they assist developers with? The MSAA used in Batman:AA is apparently a standard bit of coding that works on both ATi and Nvidia cards. The DX11 effects used in current and upcoming titles is standard coding that will work on both ATi and Nvidia cards. But ATi is going to allow Nvidia DX11 cards full access to that coding, even though it was ATi who put forth the money and time to help devs with it.

The PhysX part is arguable. Using an ATI card as a primary display card while having a cheap Nvidia card as a secondary card that handles PhysX really isn't a setup Nvidia intended to have. Nvidia really don't want to be responsible for any hardware damage on your ATI card while running PhysX, and/or crashes due to your ATI card while running PhysX.

Hardware damage? Are you serious? So Nvidia is worried that my ATi card might explode because I have an Nvidia card installed at the same time?

Can there be another reason for it? Yes, Nvidia really don't work their video card to be used as a PhysX calculator only.

That's the whole point of having a secondary Nvidia card for running PhysX. All it's doing is PhysX calculations.

Did it fried your ATI card? No. Did it cause instability in your system? No. Did it do anything that hammers your ATI card's performance? No. You may say that you Nvidia card don't work well with ATI card. If you really have a problem with this, ask Richard why ATI cards can't crossfire with Nvidia cards.

Huh? ATi cards can't Crossfire with Nvidia cards because they're completely different architectures. So now you're blaming ATi because you can't mix and match ATi and Nvidia cards in Crossfire?

 

[Dribble]

I would have more sympathy with these arguments if the batman AA:AA issue is was being brought up because many people who played the game actually cared.

If ingame AA support bought about 10-20% performance over using control panel, and tbh the game didn't need a fast card to start with, then I bet your average ati user had to drop their AA one level (running at *4 instead of *8). I bet hardly anyone who bought batman to actually play the game noticed.

In fact if nvidia hadn't written the code, and hence there was no in game AA at all no one would have cared, or complained the game looked terrible, or anything - same with bioshock or any other UE3 game that only has AA from the control panel which works fine.

Anyway the only people who seemed to notice are those who don't seem to want to play the game at all, but just comment because they want to argue. FYI arguing for the sake of it is a sure way to loose the argument, because pretty soon no bothers even listening to what you are saying and just wishes you'd shut up -well in my case it means adding someone else to my ignore list

 

[Keysplayr]

Creig, I have a whole novel in response to your spins. I'm just not doing it from a blackberry.
I'll address all your BS tonight.

 

[evolucion8]

There is no public outrage, only a few people misleaded by ATI's PR speeches along with some die hard fans. Other then them, those who played batman AA are happy. There are ATI user who stick with FSAA, or enable MSAA by "modding" the game. What is interesting from these people is, it appears ATI to be completely innocent, and trying their best by not doing anything extra to help their customer. Yet Nvidia being bad for adding something exclusively to their customer. Yes we can argue all day long, but the game is getting old and ATI still fail to deliver their version of the code.

Your lack of knowledge regarding of the issue is outstanding. The code that enables Anti Aliasing in BAA is the same on both GPU, both AMD and nVidia told Eidos on how to write the code to enable AA. So Eidos implemented the nVidia's propietary code which is identical to the one that ATi recommended, some sort of backdoor or trick to enable Anti Aliasing on Deferred Rendering in DX9.

But nVidia's code included a DeviceID lock. With the DeviceID cheat, it works fine with ATi hardware, so if it used the NVAPI, for sure it wouldn't work at all, so it proves that the Anti Aliasing function implemented is standard anti aliasing, not some propietary form through driver query aka NVAPI. But since the code was provided with a VendorLock it won't work on AMD, as simply as that. What part of that you can't understand? Without the VendorLock, Anti Aliasing will work fine regardless of the GPU vendor.

Does it make sense to implement the same code twice for both GPU vendors? Why the seggregation? Does it help the gaming community? Double standards anyone? If Anti Aliasing is implemented through normal DirectX calls, why does nVidia have to worry about QA in ATi hardware? ATi is the ones who have to take care of it. After all, both vendors support the DirectX standard. Doesn't make sense that AMD has to write special code to allow a function implemented by propietary technology made by nVidia. Follow the DirectX standard and there will be no problems at all.

 

[Wreckage]

Then do me a favor and trying Googling the words "Batman AA ATi" and review the comments left by people.

Yep, ATI fans did their best to make a mountain out of an ant hill.

The game still was very popular and was a candidate for Game of the Year.

Because in reality the AA issue was not really an issue at all and was really just a poor attempt by ATI fans to cover up AMD's poor developer relations.

If it truly was a big issue, AMD would have put the work in so their customers could have had the same level of support that NVIDIA customers have come to enjoy over the years.

 

[Creig]

Creig, I have a whole novel in response to your spins. I'm just not doing it from a blackberry.
I'll address all your BS tonight.

I see. You have an opinion on the subject and it's the correct one. I have a differing opinion on the subject and it's nothing but "spins" and BS.

Nice.

 

[Creig]

Yep, ATI fans did their best to make a mountain out of an ant hill.

Because in reality the AA issue was not really an issue at all and was really just a poor attempt by ATI fans to cover up AMD's poor developer relations.

so stupid that nvidia did this...... and this is coming from someone with nvidia cards!

I have both ATI and NV based systems and tried this on my Radeon 4870 and found that it worked.

Really terrible of NV to use a game developer this way IMHO.

Reading comprehension FTL. There are obviously Nvidia fans as well who feel this was a bad move.

In fact, anybody who isn't a total Nvidia fanatic should be upset by this move because it sets a bad precedent. Unless you happen to like the idea of game developers auctioning off in-game features to the highest bidder, that is.

I prefer to have all game features work on all cards and not have to read the fine print on every game box to check which graphics I'm allowed to see and which I'm not based on the manufacturer of the video card I happen to have installed in my system at the time. But I'm weird like that.

 

[nOOky]

I find the "TWIMTBP" splash logo a mere annoyance when I start a game. I'm all in favor of the gpu makers doing whatever they want to make a game stand out on their hardware. Just put it on the system requirements so I can skip buying the game if I have an ATI card for example, or post a disclaimer telling me my hardware isn't optimized for the game so I can go out and buy a new card to play it

 

[Wreckage]

There are obviously Nvidia fans as well who feel this was a bad move.

Yeah, sure...ok :whiste:

I can't imagine anyone reading your post and not laughing out loud.

 

[Creig]

Yeah, sure...ok :whiste:

I can't imagine anyone reading your post and not laughing out loud.

Of course you can't. Because in your eyes, Nvidia can do no wrong.

 

[Wreckage]

Of course you can't. Because in your eyes, Nvidia can do no wrong.

Calling the kettle black, does not help your statements any.

 

[Seero]

Yeah, sure...ok :whiste:

I can't imagine anyone reading your post and not laughing out loud.

I read it, and I did not laugh out loud. It is funny though how Creig and evolution8 did not know ATI paid 1 million dollars to codemaster the for right to bundle Dirt 2 with their 5xxx cards, a game that is suppose to be in Dx9, and yet never question why SLI won't work on Dirt 2.

 

[Schmide]

Batman:AA Antialiasing. This was something of a smear campaign against Nvidia. It was a perfect opportunity to call foul and create the illusion of foul play on Nvidias part.
I have spoken with the team who actually worked on Batman and added the AA content.
While they were working on it, they weren't considering that fact that they would be severely attacked publicly for it. They just added their code. Tested that code on all their hardware with the dev. They put the ID check there because they knew it would work fine on their hardware. NOT to prevent ATI hardware from using it. There was simply an "IF THEN" algorithm. IF ID = Nvidia, THEN run the code. IF ID = OTHER, Use standard game config.

So, this blew up beyond imagination. Nvidia was trying to make something better, despite the belief's and smear campaign that was slung.

AMD's smear campaign is vast. They have really amped things up over the last year or so.
It's good for their business to show NV is the worst possible light. I'm pretty much speaking to the neutral folks in here. Not to those who will spend much of their time arguing what I posted here, calling it lies, PR, Marketing, BS.

What I posted here was my knowledge acquired after speaking directly with the TWIMTBP team. There was no intention to "BLOCK" features in Batman:AA. Only to "ENABLE" features with and Nvidia card ID check to run their AA code. It is VERY easy, to confuse these.
Like saying the glass is half full, or half empty.

Keys

If this was written circa 2006-07, the half empty glass might hold water. Any programmer worth their bit bucket knows the proper ways to query capabilities on the windows platform. The inferred method used has been known for some time now.

If they seriously did not have prior knowledge of what the implications of the act (Vendor ID check) were, it is truly tragic that they hold such a coveted place in the programming community.

It is sad that you will probably lump me out of the neutral crowd (bold above). I only wish that those who subscribe to a standard reap the benefits of the standard. In this case that of the DirectX queried capabilities.

 

[Creig]

I read it, and I did not laugh out loud. It is funny though how Creig and evolution8 did not know ATI paid 1 million dollars to codemaster the for right to bundle Dirt 2 with their 5xxx cards, a game that is suppose to be in Dx9, and yet never question why SLI won't work on Dirt 2.

Perhaps if you'd researched the question yourself, you would have found the answer. I didn't even know about the issue and it took me all of 60 seconds to learn why:

Can we have some news on SLI please ?? I have had the game now for almost 2 weeks & have been holding out for an SLI profile.

This will be fixed in the patch that's currently being worked on. As yet we don't have a release date for the patch but as soon as we do we'll let you know.

This issue was passed on to the devs for them to look into, but we are currently having to wait for a new driver update from Nvidia to confirm that our proposed solution will work.

Hopefully I'll be able to update you all soon with some good news.

http://community.codemasters.com/fo...-1317/401137-sli-please-codies-some-news.html

 

[JSt0rm]

my god its amazing how much time most of you spend on this issue. I like to dip in from time to time but jeezus christ.

 

[Phynaz]

I see. You have an opinion on the subject and it's the correct one. I have a differing opinion on the subject and it's nothing but "spins" and BS.

Nice.

:thumbsup:

 

[Keysplayr]

I see. You have an opinion on the subject and it's the correct one. I have a differing opinion on the subject and it's nothing but "spins" and BS.

Nice.

Now, I'd like you to point out just where you think what I posted, was my opinion. Because none of it is my opinion. They are facts based on my discussions with the programmers.

I didn't say, "It is my opinion that the BatmanAA issue was not a lockout, but an enabler."
I didn't say, "It is my opinion that no money changes hands from Nvidia to devs in the TWIMTBP program."
Etcetera, etcetera.

What YOU are spewing, is an opinion. Backed by nothing but your "feelings" on the matter(s). It's cool to have an opinion on something. It's even cooler to have facts handed to you. You don't like the facts? Not my problem. That's your demon to deal with.

Then there is this "gem".
"Keys, if a feature is added to a game that works just as well on ATi cards as on Nvidia cards, and then a Vendor_ID check is added to allow it to run on only the Nvidia cards... That's called a "BLOCK". "

You know, something "similar" was said a while back about BatmanAA PhysX dissappearing when PhysX was set to "OFF" in the game. Some people here just about swore, that it was Nvidia who stripped out the PhysX content (papers, hanging cloths, steam/mist) when PhysX was turned off. Only have it shown when a PhysX capable Nvidia GPU was in the system. It was shown shortly thereafter that the PhysX content wasn't a part of the Batman game. Nvidia added it along with Eidos. Somebody started a thread raging about it. Calling Nvidia a bunch of SOB's for doing something like that to us gamers. (All cheer in unison).

Well, the UE3 does not support AA in DX9. Nvidia added native support for it in game for their hardware, not ATIs. They tested it on their hardware, not ATIs. So, what we have here, is a function that leaves the game completely UNCHANGED from it's original form UNLESS an Nvidia GPU is detected. Then it's (now listen closely) "enabled". Did you hear that? ENABLED. NOTHING was blocked from the standard Eidos code. The game ran the way it was originally intended to run on ATI hardware. UNLESS there was a NV GPU used.
Nobody locked anyone out of something that was never there to begin with. At least NV DID something. ATI sits and sits.

Richard Huddy quote:
"We're currently working with Eidos and we want that to be in there in a future update. That's not a commitment to it, but we are working with Eidos to make it happen because I believe it's in every consumer’s interest."

We are working on it, but sorry, we aren't committed to anything. How can you believe it's in every consumers interest if you aren't committed? "We want that to be in there". That's great Richard. With that level of fortitude, let nothing stand in your way.