A question for you PPU fans, and anyone in fact ;)

[dug777]

Like the topic says, having infintely destructible and realistic environments is all very well, but i can't begin to imagine how the game devlopers will be able to provide us with games regularly and at the prices we are paying now, for something that is becoming, and will become, a mammoth task to complete...

I'd rather have enormously fun and innovative games coming out regularly than massive, lavish and amazing games coming out increasingly irregularly, and more to the point i can't see how the industry could remain profitable under those conditions, and the associated significant increase in costs of production, without hiking the price of the games...

Just a few thoughts i've been throwing around, like to see what you folks have to say on the matter,

Cheers,

Dug.

 

[SynthDude2001]

I wouldn't mind paying more for games if they were a lot more impressive graphically/physics-wise. The basic mechanics of FPS gameplay (IMO) have not much changed in the last several years at all, and I for one think the PPU could make a big difference. If that means great games come out less regularly, so be it. I still haven't finished any of the "big three" from last year yet.

 

[VIAN]

All someone has to do is come up with a library. AKA DX10.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: dug777
Like the topic says, having infintely destructible and realistic environments is all very well, but i can't begin to imagine how the game devlopers will be able to provide us with games regularly and at the prices we are paying now, for something that is becoming, and will become, a mammoth task to complete...

I'd rather have enormously fun and innovative games coming out regularly than massive, lavish and amazing games coming out increasingly irregularly, and more to the point i can't see how the industry could remain profitable under those conditions, and the associated significant increase in costs of production, without hiking the price of the games...

Just a few thoughts i've been throwing around, like to see what you folks have to say on the matter,

Cheers,

Dug.

Technology advances software wise as well as hardware wise.
Easier to program engines means it's less of a problem to make a game, which means lower costs, or rather not so much of an increase.
If a bunch of amateurs can make mods like Red Orchestra for UT2004 or Dystopia for HL2, then a game studio with more staff and more know-how/engine access should be able to make a full game based on another engine.
From the fact that the UE3 has been licensed for over 25 games, I'd say that the way of the future may half be licensing big name, high tech engines and using them as a base to cut down costs. And when developers (like Epic) try and make their engines fairly easy to use, that's going to help developers.
The main problem comes in coding the original base that takes advantage of all the new technology (ie: the Unreal Engine 3 which AFAIK supports DX9c, dual cores and PPUs).

I read that most of the costs nowadays are heading towards employing more artists for projects because the increased levels of detail mean more textures/models/better textures/models are needed than before. It's a lot of artists putting their ideas into the games now, which can be fairly easy to do compared to before when they needed programmers to mess about with their stuff to get it in game.

 

[biostud]

In terms of possibilites in gameplay a faster video card seems more waste than a PPU. The video card will give you more eyecandy the PPU can affect the gameplay in so many ways. Theoreticly. Gameplaywise it will take some time and idea's to implement.

 

[Markbnj]

Yeah, if it isn't written into the core DirectX API then it will fade away and in a couple years we'll talk about it like we do floppy drives.

 

[Malladine]

It's not whether game developers can make innovative, fun games, or rather games with those attributes as a primary goal, but instead the question is: will people buy them. or perhaps, will the publishers support a game without flashier effects than the competition?

I don't really know how much games are costing to develop these days, but you can look at Mods such as R.O. to see that a quality, popular, fun game doesn't have to cost millions. It just takes some smart, dedicated gamers who can afford to ignore the sweet sound of money to take as long as necessary to plan, design and implement

 

[fishbits]

A question for you PPU fans, and anyone in fact While i'm all for more realism in games, how on earth do you expect game developers to keep up?

Replace "PPU" with "3d accelerator" and ask yourself that question. Many of us remember when having any 3d accelerator was a bleeding edge option for the PC. Heck, when sound other than from the pc speaker was a bleeding edge option. Would you try to make the case that adding these capabilities hurt gaming and the industry?

I'd rather have enormously fun and innovative games coming out regularly than massive, lavish and amazing games coming out increasingly irregularly, and more to the point i can't see how the industry could remain profitable under those conditions, and the associated significant increase in costs of production, without hiking the price of the games...

That would be a valid opinion with or without the PPU being considered.

Improved physics can add a lot to games. It's going to happen one way or the other. Some gamers want it sooner, for some reason other gamers want it to happen later. At any rate, giving developers the right hardware with a consistant API to achieve this seems like the way to go.

 

[SuperFubario]

Linky

New to me. Asus's card with 128 mb of ram for this thing...interesting.

Wheres our PPU board lol.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

how fast is such a PhysX card compared to the higher end models of NV and ATI?

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
how fast is such a PhysX card compared to the higher end models of NV and ATI?

Infinitely, since the GPU does not handle physics yet. So, how much faster than a CPU? Were talking 100 - 1000 times faster at that particular task.

 

[apoppin]

the developers won't keep up . . . they are about 3 years behind hardware . . .

so . . . in about 3 years expect the PPUs to be both useful and becoming "necessary"

the game ENGINES will take advantage of both multicore cpus and ppus . . . Unreal3 Engine should be able to make use of both and the next gen of all engines.

patience

 

[coomar]

its like the 3dmark05 cpu tests, it takes forever for the cpu to be able to render 3d images, thats why we off-loaded to the gpu

it makes sense to offload the physics calculations until we start using cell based cpu's (which according to roadmaps is 2010-2015)

 

[Markbnj]

[ don't really know how much games are costing to develop these days]

$10 million+ for a basic console game, budgets are much higher for complicated games, and highest for MMORPGs.

The question of whether developers will support it depends entirely on whether there is a driver architecture that will allow the game to fail over easily if the card isn't present. That is, you need a physics API, if you will, that implements its functions on the CPU at lower fidelity when the PPU isn't present. IMO this is only likely to happen if DirectX supports the hardware.

Whether MS is planning DirectPhysics, I can't say.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: apoppin
the developers won't keep up . . . they are about 3 years behind hardware . . .

so . . . in about 3 years expect the PPUs to be both useful and becoming "necessary"

the game ENGINES will take advantage of both multicore cpus and ppus . . . Unreal3 Engine should be able to make use of both and the next gen of all engines.

patience

Then in that case, your looking at about 1 year, from what I have read, not 3. But something can be useful long before it can be necessary. Therefore, I think they will be useful in 1 year and most likely necessary in 3 years. That is my take on it.

 

[Fresh Daemon]

To the OP:

If you think about it, ten or fifteen years ago you might have looked at the games we're playing today and wondered, "how the heck are they ever going to program those games?" When you're playing Pinball Dreams on your A500, BF2 looks impossible. But it's been done. And it will continue to be done. Heck, look at how far cars have come in the last century, and yet now they are easier to operate, take less time and money to build, and cost less to the consumer.

 

[dug777]

I'm enjoying and learning from the contributions thanks folks

 

[videogames101]

Eventully basic computers will cost even more the going quad sli now i think..... Or they might not but thats the direction we're heading in.....

 

[Polish3d]

The market will find a way ...

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: Frackal
The market will find a way ...

i'm lost

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: videogames101
Eventully basic computers will cost even more the going quad sli now i think..... Or they might not but thats the direction we're heading in.....

Eventully we're* gonna experience "holodeck-type" simulations . . .
:Q

imagine the headaches that'll give developers


edit: * "we" as the human race . . . not likely in our lifetime

 

[slash196]

Originally posted by: videogames101

Originally posted by: Frackal
The market will find a way ...

i'm lost

XD