FutureMark vs. [H]

Big B

Big B

HWF Godfather
You would think that some people would know how vigourously Kyle will defend [H]ard|OCP, and not try to go after them. This time ol FutureMark isn't happy with the [H]'s opinion of the 3DMark series.

Right off the front page...
You know what I mean. Your articles have consistently discredited 3DMark for years now and the few justifications there have sometimes been have been without merit. It seems to us as if you have something against our product personally and are using your popular website as a platform to attack and trying to discredit on purpose and with baseless claims and sometimes also with erroneous information.

Personally, I'm sick of companies trying to get websites to pull articles or opinions that criticize their product. I am confident that if there truely were some error in the statements, they would be changed without a problem.

Hey, FutureMark, you should check other websites too, as the folks at [H]ard|OCP aren't the only ones not putting stock in the 3DMark series.
 
And here is an e-mail I sent to FutureMark about it, expressing my concern. I encourage you to do the same, as FutureMarks threats just have me steamed.

To: Tero Sarkkinen

As a writer for another small website, http://www.zone365.com, I have found 3DMark to be a benchmark that doesn't always accurately portray system performance in actual gaming. I know that since 3DMark 2001, there has been driver "optimizations" by both ATi and nVidia for it. While this is not FutureMarks fault, it does in a roundabout way discredit the benchmark as a serious tool.

With the increasing shift toward video card performance, 3DMark's subsequent releases actually hurt it's usefulness as a benchmark. As I understand it, 3DMark does not use a commercial engine, such as Half-Life 2's Source or D00M 3. Again, the optimizations that keep cropping up do nothing to help the situation.

I caution you about trying to silence unfavorable opinions posted by websites. Nobody is asking you to like these opinions, but trying to shut someone up over it is an entirely different manner. I do not find anything wrong with a look at how worthwhile a tool is. I do not know Kyle Bennett personally, but as a reader of [H]ard|OCP myself, I have found that he will change things if they are truely incorrect or misleading. I have also seen that he will vigourously fight people who attack him without merit.

Lastly, you should know that the kinds of threats leveled against websites because you do not like them will not help FutureMark. Nobody has to use 3DMark at all, and we have the right not to. You cannot force anyone to use it if they do not want to. Please remember that you have threatened legal action against a website with a very large reader base and community. Trying to shut up one man could have a very negative impact on how the computer enthusiast community views 3DMark and the FutureMark Corporation.

Sincerely,

Brian Frank
Staff
Zone365.com
Click to expand...
 
well put Big B

I just read the emails, their attorney is looking at the situation!?! what do they think they will get out of this?
 
And the reply:

Brian,

Thank you for your feedback. While I do regret my reaction this morning, please let me explain reasons for it.

We have tried to work years with Kyle and his team and tried to solicit feedback on how we can make a better product. Unfortunately, we have not received it and at this point we're just frustrated about it.

I totally respect everyone's personal opinion. However, I was just so frustrated to see again just one line of saying we have a bad product without offering any reasons as to why he so thinks. That does not benefit anyone and that is what I hope would stop. I am totally okay for airing opinions and we welcome all feedback, good and bad, that somehow helps the industry move forward.

Sincerely,


Tero Sarkkinen
Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing

Futuremark Corporation
[email protected], http://www.futuremark.com
Click to expand...

I know that this is about some article [H]ard|OCP has not yet published, but will do so very soon.
 
This reply is BS imo. Everyone knows the reasons why some people think 3dmark isn't suitable,. nobody has to tell them, they know it as well, if not better, than any of us.
 
I've seen the same response to other people who e-mailed Taro. Benchmarks are helpful in the sense that they let you know if something is amiss with your setup by comparing it with other similar rigs. The problem lies with any program that isn't based on a real scenario.

What I would really like to see is the specific points that Taro is taking issue with. I don't think Taro will follow up with legal action, but if he does, the way it stands now, he doesn't have a leg to stand on, even with really good lawyers. Right now, the best thing he can do is either make public the specific points he sees as inaccurate or libel or issue a formal apology.

Yes, it was a rash move, but continuing to try and justify something without providing basis for it is downright insulting.

Also, I'm not willing to use benchmarks that people have to pay to use, and that's the route Futuremark is going. I don't have a problem with that, but I'm considering it less essential for testing, and the fact that I haven't done a video card review in close to two years (hopefully this will change). Benchmarks are only part of a review, and I think it's something that everybody sometimes pays far too much attention to.
 
Looks like this was over with pretty quick, as Tero has posted an apology:

Please accept my sincererest apologies for myself reacting the way I did yesterday morning and for sending those emails to Kyle that he posted on the news page. I would like to hereby let everyone know that I am withdrawing all of that. Also, I feel that I owe everyone an explanation of why it happened.

For years, we have been trying to get constructive cooperation going with the HardOCP team. However, for one reason or another none of these attempts have succeeded. So, naturally we have been little bit frustrated by it. Then, I again saw a newspost yesterday morning with just a statement that our product sucks without any explanation or argumentation or technical reason of why they so think.

This just caused an immediate, and I have to add, rather immature, reaction in myself and I sent off those emails without really thinking.

So, as a summary, I hope that we can all move forward from here. We do wish more constructive critique and I would like to emphasize that we really encourage everyone to send and publish any and all feedback, good or bad, as long as it is reasonably argumented, since only that helps this industry move forward.

Sincerely,



Tero Sarkkinen
Click to expand...
 
Damage control !

He must have received tons of "replies" (flaming), and probably not as polite as yours was, so he decided to back off.
 
I know there was at least one website that came out and said "We won't use 3DMark anymore until there is a formal apology". Not to mention the number of people that came out and said they were uninstalling 3DMark.

Kyle also told Tero to never contact him again, and any issues he had he would have to take up with the lawyers. I find it hard to believe that most judges would've taken the case anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top