• AnyStream is having some DRM issues currently, Netflix is not available in HD for the time being.
    Situations like this will always happen with AnyStream: streaming providers are continuously improving their countermeasures while we try to catch up, it's an ongoing cat-and-mouse game. Please be patient and don't flood our support or forum with requests, we are working on it 24/7 to get it resolved. Thank you.

Assasin's Creed first PC Game using DirectX 10.1

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/6571038256

we’re planning to release a patch for the PC version of Assassin’s Creed that addresses the majority of issues reported by fans. In addition to addressing reported glitches, the patch will remove support for DX10.1, since we need to rework its implementation. The performance gains seen by players who are currently playing Assassin’s Creed with a DX10.1 graphics card are in large part due to the fact that our implementation removes a render pass during post-effect which is costly.

So much for Dx10.1...
 
Pretty scummy, Nvidia (if this is true)

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3320&p=6

"So why did Ubisoft remove DirectX 10.1 support? The official statement reads as follows: "The performance gains seen by players who are currently playing AC with a DX10.1 graphics card are in large part due to the fact that our implementation removes a render pass during post-effect which is costly." An additional render pass is certainly a costly function; what the above statement doesn't clearly state is that DirectX 10.1 allows one fewer rendering pass when running anti-aliasing, and this is a good thing. We contacted AMD/ATI, NVIDIA, and Ubisoft to see if we could get some more clarification on what's going on. Not surprisingly, ATI was the only company willing to talk with us, and even they wouldn't come right out and say exactly what occurred.

Reading between the lines, it seems clear that NVIDIA and Ubisoft reached some sort of agreement where DirectX 10.1 support was pulled with the patch. ATI obviously can't come out and rip on Ubisoft for this decision, because they need to maintain their business relationship. We on the other hand have no such qualms. Money might not have changed hands directly, but as part of NVIDIA's "The Way It's Meant to Be Played" program, it's a safe bet that NVIDIA wasn't happy about seeing DirectX 10.1 support in the game -- particularly when that support caused ATI's hardware to significantly outperform NVIDIA's hardware in certain situations.

Last October at NVIDIA's Editors Day, we had the "opportunity" to hear from several gaming industry professionals about how unimportant DirectX 10.1 was, and how most companies weren't even considering supporting it. Amazingly, even Microsoft was willing to go on stage and state that DirectX 10.1 was only a minor update and not something to worry about. NVIDIA clearly has reasons for supporting that stance, as their current hardware -- and supposedly even their upcoming hardware -- will continue to support only the DirectX 10.0 feature set.

NVIDIA is within their rights to make such a decision, and software developers are likewise entitled to decide whether or not they want to support DirectX 10.1. What we don't like is when other factors stand in the way of using technology, and that seems to be the case here. Ubisoft needs to show that they are not being pressured into removing DX 10.1 support by NVIDIA, and frankly the only way they can do that is to put the support backing in a future patch. It was there once, and it worked well as far as we could determine; bring it back (and let us anti-alias higher resolutions)."
 
It's almost second nature for nvidia

Unfortunately for the consumer - it is not the first time Nvidia have performed such a stunt.

When DirectX 9.0 was the new hot thing since sliced bread, Eidos shipped Tomb Raider - Angel of Darkness. It was like Assassin’s Creed a game who took advantage of the latest DirectX technology.

Nvidia's line-up at the time was GeForce FX series of gfx-cards. Those cards’s was great in Dx8 but was inefficient rendering DX9. ATI performed well and was the speed-king as they approached DX 9.0 in simpler terms.

Source: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/77026-33-nvidia-makes-eidos-pull-patch

EIDOS Interactive, the publisher for Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness issued a patch a couple of weeks ago for the game which happened to include a way to use the game as a DX9 benchmark. Since it shows NVIDIA hardware performing slower than ATI, EIDOS has pulled it down. Remember, this is a "Way it's meant to be played" game, which means NVIDIA has paid EIDOS marketing money. Keep in mind, that this patch improved performance on both ATI and NVIDIA hardware. Here's a bs statement from EIDOS Europe:

"It has come to the attention of Eidos that an unreleased patch for Tomb Raider: AOD has unfortunately been used as the basis for videocard benchmarking. While Eidos and Core appreciate the need for modern benchmarking software that utilizes the advanced shading capabilities of modern graphics hardware, Tomb Raider: AOD Patch 49 was never intended for public release and is not a basis for valid benchmarking comparisons. Core and Eidos believe that Tomb Raider: AOD performs exceptionally well on NVIDIA hardware." - Paul Baldwin, Eidos


Eidos did eventually release a new patch v.52 , similar fixes but without a benchmark utility.
 
Back
Top