i agree that they are just testing the waters but out of the 5 people i know with sli 970s 3 have the stuttering issue and 2 seem unable to force it to happen when they do try to force it. to me this points to something else going on which nvidia have still not come clean about. buts thats another issue. if 60% of the people with them have issues then that is a pretty large amount of people who will be unhappy with their cards and will feel the need for some kind of compensation, even if it does take a couple of years to get.
to me the fact that all the retailers i have been in contact with and all the major distribution sites across europe are accepting returns (even if they are not advertising it) on them speaks volume, as they know legal action is coming and they are trying to help alleviate that now as much as they can.
i personally have not bought a 970 for myself, but that does not lessen the fact that i am disgusted that they think they can get away with such blatant fraudulent actions. it has very little impact on me in that regard but it has tarnished my reputation some what given the fact that i like many others have talked many people into buying them for their systems. when you make a living off the industry you need to know you can trust what these people say and when things like this happen it has a knock on effect to many people down the line, not just nvidia.
as for your video games analogy. some of us have the gumption to stick to our convictions so it just goes to show how weak your back bone is. nobody elses. i personally have not bought another ea games since they lied about bf3, despite the fact they keep sending me offers on games at almost no cost. i have not given activision a penny since they started to copy paste cod games every year.
now while nvidia keep up this practice of deceit about the specs of their cards and on things like gsync i will no longer be advising people to buy their products. not out of any loyalty to amd but in disgust at nvidia.
as for your perspective, you definitely added some nonsense, i will give you that.
You seem to want to be angry with any conflicting point of view, as per our usual discourse. You also seem to be either itching for a fight, or not metering your words.
To your comments about having no spine, please check your facts before waving your ignorance about. After Crysis 2 I said I was boycotting EA, and I still don't have Origin anywhere near any of my computers. Implying I didn't have a spine was foolish in the extreme, and you seem to have no grounds for accusations.
Claiming that this is somehow a breaking point, and you should be uniquely disgusted with Nvidea, is unreasonable. Perhaps history has slipped your grasp, but AMD, Nvidea, and Intel are all guilty of dishonest business practices. Intel has been forced to pay out for their anti-competitive business practices. AMD has been guilty of cherry-picking performance numbers, and Nvidea is guilty of half representing the truth. Despite this, you seem to not have an issue with either AMD or Intel. Seems like you either forgot the past, or it's impossible for you to recommend any hardware. So, are you guilty of ignorance, hypocrisy, or over-reaction? With reasonable perspective, I need to know which it is.
Waving the banner of trust is an absolute failure of logic. I trust that my 100 Mbit connection actually provides about 70 useable, because I see it. I trust that my cell phone works, only when I can make a call on it. I trust that the computer parts I buy are the best, because independent reviewers provide performance statistics. If you take for granted that AMD, Nvidea, and Intel are all 100% honest you're in for some rather severe disappointment. Suggesting otherwise implies you've either got no life experience, or you've got a boundless ability to overlook demonstrable track records. Every tech company embelishes the truth, and the questions is whether what you are seeing is an outright lie or just a partial truth. If that isn't entirely reasonable, I've got a 90 acre chunk of land on the moon I'll sell you for $10,000 per acre. If you forward me the money, I'll send you the deed once the check clears.
Finally, let's agree to be reasonable here. A very, very, very small percent of people use SLI. A vast majority of people have monitors that are 1920x1080 or smaller. The overlap area, where higher pixel counts and SLI setups intersect is where Nvidea is demonstrating design flaws. People experiencing this should return their cards, but be real about the impact. If you own a huge monitor, AMD is the performance and price winner. If you have the money for SLI, you've got enough to just buy a 980. Making this a problem that requires legal action is using Niagra falls to put out one match; extreme over-kill. Arguing that the product is a lie is foolish. There is 4 GB of VRAM on the card, which is what Nvidea promised. The inability to use all 4 GB at the same speed is less than an honest assessment of performance, but isn't demonstrably a lie. There is no valid avenue for an accusation of an outright lie.
All of this said, get back to the thread topic. This isn't about recommending Nvidea hardware, AMD being more honest, or even corporate honesty policies. This is whether or not the "controversy" will influence a purchasing decision. I stick by my response, that it will not. The 970 is a good, if flawed, product. It isn't right for some, but there's very little reason that someone building a PC today couldn't put one into a four year build for someone and not be reasonably assured that they'd be happy with it. I know of many people still running a 6570 today, that rarely complain about the visuals. Comparing a 6570 to the 970 is a joke, yet there's still life left in it.