Printable View
Edit: Retesting some more, will add the new link later.
http://www.images.clunk.org.uk/artic...-article/3.pngQuote:
Yesterday, I reported on the release of ATI's OpenCL platform beta release and I thought it rude not to give it a try!
The release consists of ATI Stream SDK beta V2.0, and ATI OpenCL beta driver V2.0. Having downloaded this to run on a PC primarily used for animation using Blender, I decided to try it on my main gaming machine...
nvidia's just lost a major part of their marketing
Hey Clunk, can you provide a video for us?
If I remember correctlly there was driver which emulated PhysX hardware on CPU. Although Im not sure if Nvidia still distributes this with its GPU drivers. Also I doubt that NV used OpenCL to write PhysX libs.
I'm sure this driver just tricked the game and the PhysX is running on the CPU if anything. Unless this game is OpenCL-only, I see no way why CUDA should magically be running on an ATI card. If, however, this is all true, I will prepare my jaw to drop.
does this mean ati can use physix via openl?
or does that mean futuremark and batman support opencl physics effects?
sounds like the former to me... but thats odd :confused:
and the latter would be way better, as most of the effects can be done on our cpus as well, and id prefer to use some of those 5-7 idle cores (i7 with ht) instead of sacrificing gpu power.... :shrug:
interesting news, didnt expect this!
its cool to have physix running on ati... but its still physix... and it still sucks, so... heh, not really that useful :D
I'm almost certain it works that way, yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechromancer
and yet made the market for the gpu bigger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helloworld_98
Videos on the way, he's just encoding and upping to youtube. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
I heard Dave Hoff (former nVidia employee that worked on designing CUDA and now works for ATI) offered nVidia to help them porting PhysX to OpenCL. He says its really simple. nVidia rejected the offer because they want to stick to there closed-source bullshyte.Quote:
Originally Posted by kl0012
http://www.rage3d.com/previews/video.../index.php?p=4
PhysX is running on the CPU in these situations, and as the article points out it's quite slow.
PhysX works on the CPU.
With a more advanced programmable shaders in ATi's newly released cards, it wouldn't be hard to allow for those CPU hooks to be redirected to whatever GPU is out there than can calculate the Ageia middleware...
Right?
Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Clunk
Could you also give some instructions on how to install this/what programs to download? I followed the thread and stumbled upon what to do. However, it's a tad complex for just driver install. Care to elaborate a bit?
How about that CUDA-Z benchmark. Would you be able to run that with OpenCL installed?
no. openCL and CUDA are similar but not the same. it looks like physx could live if they have it on openCL. nV already has a lot of good development tools for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
http://techreport.com/articles.x/17618/13Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
Nvidia is on a mission of being hated by everyone.Quote:
I'd say that in this situation, failing to make use of the CPU power available amounts to sabotaging performance on your competition's hardware.
Click on the forum link at the bottom of the article and there's instructions on how to install the bits and pieces there. He's working on a simplified install guide now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
its probably running on one core only then... hope the guys at clunk can check cpu and cpu core usage with physix enabled and disabled, that should clear things up :)Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
oh and physix running slow on a cpu says more about the way its coded than the performance of the cpu is my guess ;)
i read somewhere that nvidia was very active in opencl development and that opencl is actually very similar to cuda? and they ported physix to run onto their gpus using cuda, right? so is that true? is opencl and cuda very similar? and if yes, is it similar because nvidia supported opencl and donated a lot of code, or is it similar because of other reasons?
He's checking it out now :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
do we really want physix around though? :/ good dev tools or not, wide spread usage or not... i cant say physix has really advanced phycics effects in games... the effects look about the same as havoc and other stuff, or worse, and they tend to cripple fps... even on nvidia highend cards... :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
cool! full screen taks manager screenshots with refresh speed set to high for physix disabled, medium and high would be great, cheers! :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Clunk
How do you check physic activity? :confused:
Ninja Edit:
Or are we talking about specific cpu (and/or GPU) usage when physics are used?
YES I DO!Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I played just 2 games with Physix: Mirror's Edge & Batman Arcanum Asylum, and it was a great experience. Now after finishing those two games, I can admit that i couldn't play these two games again without Physix active. For me, Physix changed the entire feeling of the game.
Well i dont care if its called Physix, or Havoc-Physix, I just want this thing implemented in all games, and also ATI cards to run it and everybody to be happy and shake hands. :)
Batman Arcanum Asylium Physix Benchmark
Haha, just pick an object and shoot it :)Quote:
How do you check physic activity?
:D damn now i think nvidia will drop physx since there is no more reason for it to exist :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by thenrz
This is what folk have been saying all this time now :D.
Unless a game or benchmark explicitly supports opencl there is no way to use either CPU or GPU physics of any kind.
It is not possible to run Nvidia physx with opencl runtimes (CPU or GPU), without cuda support and physx drivers.
righty so :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
....Mirrors Edge was worth every bit of the FPS hit for physics. Hell if your like me and play at 720p (bc thats all ur TV supports besides 1080i). Then your pretty much in the clear for a plenty high FPS with physics enabled. Any higher(which alot of people seem to game at MUCH higher resolutions now-a-days) and your probably going to suffer unless you have a dedicated physics card.
Regarding the CPU usage, it seems to drop when the steam/smoke comes into the frame. It's a bit of a difficult one to measure, but until we can find a better way, here's a camcorder shot (scroll to the bottom). If you skip to around the 2:00 mark, you'll see the steam/smoke come into shot and one of the CPU cores drop from 91% to 18%.
He's done some Fraps movies too and will get them up later tonight hopefully :up:
Edit: Re-testing, will add new link later.
Exactly. Batman does not use OpenCL. I smell BS and a bad interpretation of the results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marios
On a side note, that article is full of fail. The autor doesn't know what he's talking about.
"Physics drivers" :lol:Quote:
Yes, I think that ATI's beta OpenCL and Stream SDK V2.0 driver releases this week definitely do utilise physics drivers
ati opencl drivers are broken/sucky when compared to nvidia's. I love ati, but I can't believe the driver support is this crappy. It throws a bunch of errors on dolphin, but on nvidia, it works fine.
i dont think that physX is on openCL and there is a patch to make batman AA have the physX work in multi core isntead of the 1 so on a quad it runs fine, my system gets about 60-65fps. its not quite as good as gpu only physX but its close
dolphin is coded on NV cards and NV uses proprietary commands and a proprietary compilerQuote:
Originally Posted by Boogerlad
Dolphin is not coded for NV cards. In their OpenCL implementation they use standard API calls. Nothing propietary.
@the batman:aa video:Quote:
Originally Posted by nr4
the sad thing is that these phsyics effects were possible before as well (even though a few effects are more realistic with physx, e.g. smoke).
i don't blame nvidia for using physx effects. what i dislike is that if physx is turned off, you don't have any physics at all... just look at the smoke or the banners. these things could be done more statically without physx as well, especially the fog! the scene in batman:aa in the pcgh video shows this behavior pretty good. instead of using static fog when physx is disabled they totally destroy the atmosphere by not including any fog at all. and this is what really pi**es me off. static fog is around since 1999 or smth and yet they castrate the game and force you to use a nvidia gpu to see fog - else you just see a clean and empty room. bah :mad::(
i thought that they used the NV compiler, and last time i checked the devs on dolphin use NV cards and had some proprietary ogl commands in older builds. were do u get the oCL plug inQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
the ogl plugin is compiled as standard. The nv compiler thing is old and they fixed it in the first couple hundred revisions. They're on svn 4434 now. There are separate builds of opencl for ati and nvidia, but the standard builds work on all cards. http://cid-ec92aae47a89073b.skydrive...n?view=details
You'd take such an fps hit JUST for some broken glass and flappy plastic doors?Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry
That's :banana::banana::banana::banana:ed up.
By the way, games can do both EASILY without physx. MARKETING PLOY.
Just saying I really enjoyed mirrors edge.... 9800gx2 for video and an 8600gts for physx.
And at only 720p it was smooth as glass gameplay all the way through, even with on an Opteron 165 @ 3ghz...
Hell after I played ME and assaisns creed, I later sold the system out because I didn't use it anymore...
Though I'm now building and am2 rig for this winter to game on...assasns creed 2 here I come!
AC2 was delayed until march for the PC
Some Dolphin devs use ATI, some NV. Everything runs on both, no propietary commands.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
OCL is not a plugin. And I confirm their implementation doesn't work on ATI cards with the OCL drivers. Reading the errors, it seems it's the developers' fault.
+1 nicely said stargazer. OCL is an extension to the graphic plugins for texture conversion. Nice fps speedup on nvidia cards, and ati cards get vector scalar issues.
Exactly, let's see if those errors can be sorted out by the devs.
hmm. i run the game with jacked up texture filtering and physx and still get 60fps all on a single gpu. way to be dead wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
Exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
Banners waving in the wind can still be added and look realistic, it just that you can shoot bullets threw them. Batman A2, simple doesn't render anything, to over-illustrate the licensed Nvidia PhysX. It's a business deal, don't forget that.
The whole PhysX is overrated IMO as not many games out there really take its advantage nor you realize it even exits in the game. Sure there are exceptions like Mirror's Edge and Batman AA but for the rest, it's all about Nvidia marketing that make people think PhysX is a vital part of the game while in fact it isn't. And for the Nvidia fanboys showing their PhysX e-penis too. As long as the graphics and gameplay are great I'm sure every gamers out there could care less about PhysX.Quote:
Originally Posted by nr4
We've all played games with and without physx and I think it's safe to say that physx doesn't "make" the game. Though it definitely adds eye candy and I definitely prefer to use physx when I can, I've never even thought of physx as as requirement or selling point for a game. A big problem for physx is that it's still not available to everyone since there's a strict hardware requirement, so it's difficult for developers to justify spending more time and money to implement a bunch of features that only a fraction of their customers can use.
physx = marketing gayness
adding random flags doesn't add much; but i did like the smoke, papers and webs, that did add to the atmosphere;Quote:
Originally Posted by nr4
Physics does make some games. World of Goo for example, and Bontago. And those don't even require a video card for calculations. Just imagine how complex a physics centric game could be on a GPU.
but that's the problem... physx doesnt add any eye candy that wouldnt be possible without it as well. if there was no physx everyone would see fog, steam and waving flags and not only people with nv gpus. so from a customer's standpoint physx actually cripples games and graphics/physics for a large group of gamers.Quote:
Originally Posted by punkrockpolak
Been pulled? :(
Should be back later.
Can you name a game with decent cloth simulation? Check out the flags at 1:14 in this video. Is that the great physics that you're referring to?Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
I hear a lot of people saying that we can do xyz without PhysX but nobody ever actually links to a game doing it. The one thing I've seen is interactive fog in Stalker, but that's about it.
I'm not an NV-fanboie taking the nvidia-extenze my e-penis pill, wether it be ati or nvidia, I prefered the added effect of physics in general. Now I haven't played batman:aa but from has been said if I wanted to enjoy the physics of that particular game, I'd have to have an Nv gpu. Which sucks in the end of it all. Nvidia has played some dirty tricks get thier physx as a standard...which is retarded with DirectX 11 coming...Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
9.11 beta openCL drv doesn't support ATI GPU to do PHYSX, no matter in 3DMARK Vantage CPU Test2 or Batman AA 1.1:p:
9.9 whql drv
http://bbs.pczilla.net/attachments/m...682d505a19.jpg
9.11 beta opencl drv
http://bbs.pczilla.net/attachments/m...8fdeb780ad.jpg
9.9 whql drv
http://bbs.pczilla.net/attachments/m...c0740b4a51.jpg
9.11 beta opencl drv
http://bbs.pczilla.net/attachments/m...e0b8eaac4d.jpg
Cloth simulation is not too dificult task for CPU. There is another reason why we don't see it in games (probably "lazy developers" :)).Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtyIjRD6lAwQuote:
Originally Posted by Havok
Another demo of cloth sim on CPU from Havok:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZAklyFa_D0
And something interesting from Project Offset (which probably uses Havok's tools):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jC6m...eature=related
You have a point. I know that Guild Wars 2 will be incorporating Havok physics (CPU based), and you can get glimpses of it in action in the trailer, especially at the scene when the new warrior toon is in the water. Both the cloth of his cape and the motion of the water contain elements of physics, and look really good...Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
I think it was obvious the OP doesn't know what he's talking about? Do we really need a confirmation mao5?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DysX2LEj9kM&fmt=22Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
This game is from 2006. It had to be recorded at only 30fps but it's already fluid with that. In-game physics are awesome, the car's movement is ultra realistic, even having into account the style of the game.
And there are lots of other games, this is just one I've installed. Physics hardware acceleration is a scam today. Nobody will moan when they release an API that accurately emulates reality, needing the use of dedicated hardware for the calculations. But if you try to sell effects we had years ago but this time with perfomance penalties and hardware restrictions, people will moan. However, as always, there will be some conformists and fanboys ready to defend their precious company and its actions.
i think you misunderstood what i was saying :)Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
re-read my first posting: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...6&postcount=34
what i was saying is that these more realistic effects are cool and i'm fine if people with a nvidia gpu can utilize their gpu for better physic effects - even though it's lame to lock ati customers out, but that's just a feature of nv gpus, but that's another story.
BUT what i don't like about it is that they cripple games and don't add any physics at all if no nvidia gpu is present.
they could include static fog and banners - but nooo, they remove such things altogether if physx is disabled and therefore the atmosphere suffers tremendously.
exactly. we already had waving flags in unreal tournament in 1999. it's not as realistic and not destroyable (e.g. when shooting it), but it's better than no flag at all - which happens when physx is disabled.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
i don't see the problem to add static flags/banners instead of removing them. or what i said about the fog.
2 words:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Static. Animation.
:stick:
No physics simulation whatsoever.
You want realtime simulation of something you can't even see when you're playing? In a 2006 free game? ;)
Use PhysX or Havok or something else without the hardware paths and stop ruining games.
I'm SO sure we need a dedicated processor to have fog and breaking cristals in a game like Mirror's Edge. Next one will be: you need a GTX2xx card to see Batman's robe, otherwise he'll play with no robe at all ;)
Actually yes. I'd like that.
But the quest we're on is called "name a game with decent cloth simulation".
Animation doesn't apply.
Guys, I apologise if the article has misled or upset anyone, that was not the intention. I did not write the article, nor do I even have the Batman game or a 4890, one of our news team stumbled across the drivers and decided to try it for himself. It was the drop in CPU usage that was shown in the video that led him to the conclusion that there was some kind of physics happening and with hindsight, it probably shouldn't have been posted until it had been tested further. I have since removed the article from the site. You win some, you lose some and some you fail miserably :)Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Yeah no argument there.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
Thank you. Not sure how canned animations are indicative of a CPUs capacity to do cloth simulations. Sure, if you're looking for the visual effect that's fine but it's completely irrelevant to a discussion on physics. We've had fake smoke, water, destruction etc for ages too.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
Fine, I guess you'd define as animation physics everything except Havok, PhysX and the like. I'll name Assassin's Creed or any UE3 game.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
Now a question for anybody asking for "cloth simulation": it's your turn to name engines with "cloth simulation" and games using those engines.
Also, for the sake of the argument, you should define cloth simulation, put examples of both good and bad simulations, and what kind of resources a good simulation requires.
You used that game as an example ofQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Then say you cant even see when you're ingame when it was challenged? :shrug: Are you trolling? cus I can't tell.:up:Quote:
In-game physics are awesome, the car's movement is ultra realistic, even having into account the style of the game.
When they are talking about "cloth simulation", they are talking about simulating the behaviour of soft bodies with physics based calculations, applying forces in real time on the different polygons of the object to generate at runtime a physics based animation. That way the animation is generated depending on collision detection with other objects, or applying other forces, in real time.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
On the other hand, most of current cloths and other soft bodies "simulations" are faked with pre-scripted animations ("static" animations). The thing with pre-scripted animations is that they are scripted so they don't interact with anything. At most, you can make different animations in order to play one or another depending on the event which triggers the animation or at random to add some variety, but each animation would be always the same.
OFP2 does Physics with Havoc.Not sure about cloth but blowing up buildings,shooting glass etc all looks very nice.The game itself is a bit limited imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
If you're into cloth fetishes:
http://www.havok.com/index.php?page=havok-cloth
:p:
@Farinorco
Every script is a simulation. The animation of the flags in that game and lots of other effects in others are calculated, then scripted, repeated, etc. You can call them simulated. Everything that mimics reality is simulated. That's why I'm asking these guys for their definition. Good, bad, simulated, etc. are terms that mean different things for different people in this context. What you're describing is the meaning of interactive, not simulated. You can call every part of a game a simulation, including any kind of physics.
Most game physics today just don't represent gravity or fluids the way we see them. Everything is slow, is floating. Is that simulated gravity, in the sense of your simulated cloths? Simulated means real looking, real time, interactive, or what for you? Real time can be bad looking and viceversa. This is and endless discussion of what's good and what's bad. In the end we have more and more games that don't really represent reality better, yet you need more and more resources to calculate effects that doesn't really improve what we had before in the critical areas that need to be improved in order for the effects to be considered real. Morons at game studios excluding potential customers with propietary implementations don't help either.
You should read before calling someone a troll. The guy asked for simulated cloth physics. These are simulated cloth physics. The rest was just extra info. When I said they can't be seen I meant you can't see them when you're actually playing the game, considering the speed you're playing at. That's the main reason they're scripted. Of course they can be seen if you stop the car and look at them, if not I couldn't have recorded that video :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_fantasy
Of course the scripts must come from somewhere...Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
What I'm describing is what they are calling "cloth simulation" and what they are calling "static animations", nothing else. You have asked about that point, haven't you?
Of course, everywhere you are using something to represent an event that is not real, is a "simulation". But I think it's obvious that they are talking about real time cloth physics simulation when they are asking for titles with cloth simulation... I don't think that arguing semantics is going to change their point...
I just ordered an old Ageia Physx 128meg card off ebay just to try and see if it will get me the physX extras on Batman AA... I've read conflicting reviews of usage with 4870x2?
Not sure if it will work or not?? If not guess it'll go right back on ebay... Has anyone here tried using one with modern games (LoL games over 2 years I should say :) ??
viccan: You can use a PhysX device with your ATI but you need some haxx0rz. Easy stuff though.
there is a cracked physX driver that will make it work with ati cards rendering (not sure if it works on the agea) or u can just use an older driver that supports ati cards and physX
i also dont think that they were legally able to pull support for ati cards using an agea card, i would expect them to put it back soon or to get a class action lawsuit
I asked if you are a troll. you should read before accusing someone of calling you a troll. :up: There is a difference between calling someone gay and asking if they are gay.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
I read that the Old 8.09.04 drivers will work, while not fully supporting the new code for games such as batman aa. I was unaware of the new cracked/ hacked drivers are they based on the 9.09.0203 driver or recent? I tried googling but didn't see anything? can you PM me a link ?? Id really appreciate it..Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
Thanks for the heads up :):up:
its in the news sectionQuote:
Originally Posted by viccan
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=235968
i dont know if its for gforce only or if it works on agea, and batman works with the physX drivers from the original UT3 in cpu mode and it actually works better than the newer ones for teh cpu mode
Meh, pity. :(
http://andreworlowski.com/wp-content...to_believe.jpg
In PhysX on ATI card! :p: :D
I was the one who wrote the article, and I would like to add my apologies to Clunks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clunk
I did think that something had happened in testing that meant in game physics were happening, but I should have tested further to establish that.
Once again, my apologies.
what's the ****, Anti-aliasing and physics can't coexist even with 4850+9800GT
as you know, now I let my 9800GT as PPU in w7 with the PhysX mod patch from Liandri / THETA, 9800 GT did do PPU job in Batman 1.1, now I can get 90 avg fps in the benchmark (1680x1050 all max no AA PhysX normal), compared with 16 avg fps in the benchmark with only 4850 single card.
the config menu of Batman 1.1 said you can enable AA on ATI control panel (CCC), but when I eanble 4xMSAA in 9.9 ccc, with PhysX normal, enter the game, I found AA indeed enbale on Batman at the mainmenu of the game, but when the the game start (batman and joker enter the prison, I found it's actually no AA, fps is the same as 1680x1050 all max no AA PhysX normal.
when I turn off PhysX in the the config menu of Batman 1.1,eanble 4xMSAA in 9.9 ccc, the AA works both in the 3D mainmenu and in the game (batman and joker enter the prison).
Overall, I found even with 9800GT as PPU, Anti-aliasing and physics still can't coexist, as long as there's ATi Graphics card in the system.
but, I saw a 275 grahics cards run Batman 1.1 with both PhysX on Highlevel and 4xMSAA on, fps between 6x-9xfps.
Any hack or crack for my 4850+9800GT?:shrug:
:shakes: :(Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
what is cloth simulation>
Clothing physics, I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by webbyboy
flags or banners or capes waving in the wind...Quote:
Originally Posted by webbyboy
not a very useful effect if you ask me, as its hard to implement it in a way it actually impacts game play and is more than something happening on the periphery of your vision that you dont really pay attention to.
the most important implementations of physics are ragdoll, object physics and destructable environment physics imo...
water and cloth are cool but... really pointless when it comes to games...
it will always be a gimmick, unless its boat game for example... but most games dont really involve water and cloth...
i remember the first time coming in contact with cloth physics... splinter cell with xbox when i was like 13. i actually played with the cloth for like an hourQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
absolutely baffled and amazed by the stuff
i think cloth is really nice in stealth games, and some shooters
In a few years it could be more useful.. MMO's for example. Clothing on, clothing off.. clothing on the flagpole.. clothing on the trees.. :rofl::DQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
On the contrary, I find real time soft bodies physics (including cloth physics) a very noticeable and therefore useful visual quality improvement.
There are lots of things that respond to soft bodies physics, like character cloths themselves (especially long coats, cloaks, robes...), hair, vegetation, ropes, flesh :rolleyes:, the mentioned flags, banners or capes... there are lots of things that simply are not rigid bodies, and give an absolutely unrealistic look if animated as such.
Of course, you always can (and usually do) animate those things simulating their softness or flexibility through scripted animations, to get rid of part of that rigidness and awful feel, but those scripted animations are repetitive (because each script is always played in the exact same way) and completely unaware of each moment circumstances, other object interactions (apart from triggering the animation, of course, but once being played, it's going to play the same regardless where and how it has been collided and so)...
And yeah, maybe they are not of much use to gameplay. Neither them, or HDR, or tesselation, or high quality textures, or a beautiful deferred lighting system, or... you possibly could play the same games without a programmable shading pipeline, even without T&L fixed pipeline, and probably without textures (you always can use plain colors to paint the polygons), and gameplay would be little to no affected (if we understand gameplay as the strict set of goals and rules that define the game itself), but I don't think the whole experience of playing those games would be the same, do you?
What I'm not convinced about is that those effects really need to be processed on a GPU to be done. The Bullet Physics demos of soft bodies are running great and with room to spare in a 5 years old P4 3GHz even when throwing dozens of papers (or similar plain, flexible sheets) on the screen (there are other things in the demos as ropes and funny gelatinous bunnies :lol:)
good point, clothing was cool in splinter cell!Quote:
Originally Posted by Newblar
ohohoho especially the cloithing on and clothing OFF feature might be very interesting in certain future adult game titles :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
and yeah, mmos as well... imagine changing the armor of your female nightelf from metal to a chain-shirt and seeing it move around when shes running and see the shape of the nipples stick out when looking at it from the side :eek: :slobber:
:lol:
but again, those are more gimmick like features... they should focus on getting object and radgoll and destructable environment physics dont right first, then work on cloth and water...
Why ragdolls or destructable environment physics are less gimmicky? :shrug: I only find destructable environment useful from a gameplay perspective in some very specific titles, with massive weapons and a tactical component based on terrain (OK, maybe you could think about other uses, but are more especific than generic uses). And ragdolls... they are more or less the same than soft bodies regarding the gimmick thing... that I can think of.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Then again, graphics are the most gimmicky feature amongst them, and I don't see that much people asking developers to get ragdolls and destructable environment before they waste their time on graphics...
i think we need more cloth physics, im tired of how crappy character models are. imagine if you actually wore a shirt, or a leather jacket, or mail armor. each one would move and react differently, instead of just being stretched with the character model.
i think bioshock is a great example of a very nicely detailed world, but what i would consider some of the crappiest with character models. the things we interact with most, havnt changed much in the last decade. (HL1 models can look like Crysis if you up the polygon count and added high res textures)
This topic was an interesting read because I find myself in the ATI and NVIDIA camp. I have CFX 4890s and soon to arrive CFX 5870. I also have 2 x Zotac GTX 295 in QUAD -SLI. When I purchased the ATI cards I was aware I will not have PHYSX. To be honest, it does not really bother me that much. Why do I say that? Well, as I mentioned I have two 295s and I see how games are with Physx and without. Batman is a nice game but having PHYSX is like having The Gladiator Extended UNCUT/UNSEEN version with the additional scenes. Sure, it is lovely to see Maximum talk to the troops when the medics chop their legs off or to see Commodus beating up Caesar's statue. Lovely, but I ask you, do they actually help the PLOT? Not in my opinion. Same with physx. An addition that does not alter how the game needs to unfold.
Sure, when I run Batman on the ATIs no steam, smoke, flags, poles, papers moving when I step on them but I can still enjoy the game and it will run quite nicely on an ATI setup. When a game will not run because I have ATI and it will ask for an NVIDIA card, then I will have a problem. At the moment, PHYSX is nice but a rip off. I am no ATI / NVIDIA fanboy.
well thats just my opinion... when i play crysis or farcr2 or batman i dont pay attention to the characters clothes, and if they move in the wind or when they move their bodies etc... what i like is how they are moving, how they react to explosions, gun fire and objects flying at them. and i really love to blow things up and have tons of objects fly around, hitting other objects, kicking those around... and of course destructable environment...Quote:
Originally Posted by Farinorco
damn theres a house blocking my way, oh wait
*pulls out bazooka*
oh no, there isnt :cool: :D
you can do this, partially, in farcr2 and crysis... the best implementation is farcry2 where you can completely level and destroy some huts and road blockades and fences by shooting at them or running them over with a car.
i wouldnt even notice if any of the characters had propperly animated clothes on them... and even if i would, it would be cool for a few minutes and then id move on and ignore it...
i think in mmos like wow cloths would rock though... thats true... and street fighter4 too... :D
i think it would apply to alot of games where cutscenes are quite common. imagine the budget they could save by not having to make high quality animations just for a cutscene.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
yeah and fighter games would really get some benefit out of nice clothing. (i think they really need to get good physics in those games first. never knew you could punch holes in rocks before)
awww you know what :(
this discussion made me remember how excited i was when ageia stepped up and there was all this physics is the next big thing, we will have this and that, and there will be physics done on gpus... and i imagined all the cool possibilities... and then all that we got was physix, and then physix on gpus... meh :/
what a huge let down...
but what has changed? nothing... havoc seems to have stood still for years and physix has evolved from "wow what a joke" to "almost as good as havoc"
sigh...
cloth physics would be a godsend in MMO's :D
There is already a HL2 mod to make Alyx's mammalian appendages jiggly without Phusx. what more do we need?
Bouncing boobs in every Korean's MMO barely clothed female character?Quote:
Originally Posted by PagenII
in WoW, a female Night Elf on the character selection screen would stand there for a little while, and eventually do some jumping around. blizzard knows proper physics and puts them to good use.
Cloth physics is something you won't notice till it's gone. Remember all those games with pre-baked lighting? I don't either :)