Hawken, holy gpu physx!

[blackwhiskers]

lol, good for you, good for you.

 

[Lonbjerg]

lol, good for you, good for you.

You posted nothing ro show that scripted events are the same as dynamic simulations, you only tried to deflect from that point...find another posterto play the fallacy game of "shiting the goalposts" with...I have no interest.

 

[Lonyo]

Prove it.
You like to talk smack...now I am calling you on it.

(hint: The intelligent reader would notice the fallacy; Dynamic physics vs scripted events)

1) Read the ENTIRE post.
2) Comprehend the post.
3) Understand the meaning of the post.
4) Reply to the post.

You seem to have done part of 1) and then skipped to 4).

As indicated by the ENTIRE post, rather than going from having absolutely nothing to having PhysX simulated particles, they could have had basic scripted effects which were a basic and scripted form of what PhysX produces.
Instead they have near enough absolutely nothing.

I didn't say "these things could be done without PhysX using scripts", I said these things, IN BASIC TERMS, e.g. having SOMETHING happen when you shoot the shield, or having SOME swirly random crap around the charger, having SOME random ember things, could be done in scripted terms.
That's the basic terms part. Having something, rather than nothing.
The scripted part is having that something be scripted.

That's not saying "they could do all of the exact same things without PhysX", it's saying "they could do SOMETHING without PhysX, but instead they decided to do pretty much nothing".

Does that help you out?

Also not sure why I even bothered to reply, since you won't even read this reply, and even if you do, you will make up in your head what you think I said, and talk about that, rather than talking about what I said in my post, which is consistent with my other posts in this thread, none of which have been directed at you.

 

[Lonbjerg]

1) Read the ENTIRE post.
2) Comprehend the post.
3) Understand the meaning of the post.
4) Reply to the post.

You seem to have done part of 1) and then skipped to 4).

As indicated by the ENTIRE post, rather than going from having absolutely nothing to having PhysX simulated particles, they could have had basic scripted effects which were a basic and scripted form of what PhysX produces.
Instead they have near enough absolutely nothing.

I didn't say "these things could be done without PhysX using scripts", I said these things, IN BASIC TERMS, e.g. having SOMETHING happen when you shoot the shield, or having SOME swirly random crap around the charger, having SOME random ember things, could be done in scripted terms.
That's the basic terms part. Having something, rather than nothing.
The scripted part is having that something be scripted.

That's not saying "they could do all of the exact same things without PhysX", it's saying "they could do SOMETHING without PhysX, but instead they decided to do pretty much nothing".

Does that help you out?

Also not sure why I even bothered to reply, since you won't even read this reply, and even if you do, you will make up in your head what you think I said, and talk about that, rather than talking about what I said in my post, which is consistent with my other posts in this thread, none of which have been directed at you.

A lo of fluff to cover over this statement:

Some of those things could be done in basic, scripted, terms without using PhysX.

And once again, I ask you to prove it.
You said it...live with it.

 

[coffeejunkee]

There are 2 physx settings and off, AMD cards use the cpu. On the lower setting.

I take it the video is comparing to the 'off' setting? I'd be more interested in seeing the difference between 'on' and 'high (nvidia only)'.

As for the effects, personally I didn't really like them apart from the forceshield impacts. Too much, too coarse.

BTW, welcome to the forums blackwhisker. Here's a handy feature: click username > view public profile > user lists > add to ignore list. Enjoy your stay.

 

[Dravonic]

A lo of fluff to cover over this statement:


And once again, I ask you to prove it.
You said it...live with it.

You're getting too caught up with that single poorly worded sentence. He went on to explain what he meant by that, and he's completely right. The developers could have come up with some animated textures to create a simplified version of the shield reacting to gunfire, for example. Instead they did nothing.

 

[Lonyo]

A lo of fluff to cover over this statement:


And once again, I ask you to prove it.
You said it...live with it.

So basically you're telling me the only way to create any kind of impact related effects upon attacking a shield is with PhysX?
The only way to create swirly embers is with PhysX?
The only way to create random glowy stuff on a recharge station is with PhysX?

All these things existed and were in games before PhysX existed.
What do I need to prove? That games existed before PhysX? Well, they did. Fact. Not sure how you want me to prove that fact, but I would hope your own experience is good enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYyc0Z5adgg#t=23s

On the left you can see the shield gets hit by the gun and there's no effect, whereas on the right you can see that the turbulence is creating all sorts of particle features that make the scene much more immersive

"There's no effect".
Why is there no effect? Is it because there can be no effect without PhysX? Or is it because they simply didn't include anything at all, even a basic scripted effect, and instead left it as having absolutely nothing at all.

"But prove you can have some particles floating around without PhysX!"

[url]http://wiki.beyondunreal.com/Legacy:Particle_System[/url]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y6DJZSqzVY#t=8m43s

 

[sontin]

And Hair was in other games, too.

So, i guess we don't need AMD's TressFX for "realistic" hair. :sneaky:

 

[SlowSpyder]

I thought most of the effects looked great! I just don't think I saw anything that really couldn't be done on the CPU. But, it looked good none the less.

 

[Final8ty]

And Hair was in other games, too.

So, i guess we don't need AMD's TressFX for "realistic" hair. :sneaky:

Wrong context, because he said effects, being "realistic" is another mater and having physics does not automatically = "realistic"

 

[Plimogz]

And Hair was in other games, too.

So, i guess we don't need AMD's TressFX for "realistic" hair. :sneaky:

Kinda. We certainly don't need to pretend that if you're not running TressFX Lara need necessarily run around bald, because, hey, how else could they possibly put a pony tail on there without GPU-compute acceleration?

 

[Dravonic]

And Hair was in other games, too.

So, i guess we don't need AMD's TressFX for "realistic" hair. :sneaky:

You're missing the point. I don't think anyone is arguing PhysX effects don't look better than their CPU equivalents. The issue here is what developers did with PhysX off in Hawken is the equivalent of bald Lara.

 

[Lonyo]

And Hair was in other games, too.

So, i guess we don't need AMD's TressFX for "realistic" hair. :sneaky:

As someone else said, it would be like having either TressFX or NO HAIR. I think it was possibly said in the TressFX thread as well.

There's a difference between having unrealistic/non simulated hair vs realistic/simulated hair, and having NO HAIR vs realistic/simulated hair.

We've had particles in games for ages, maybe we need GPU accelerated physics for realistic particles, but we don't need GPU accelerated physics for particles.

People seem to be confusing, or simply just misrepresenting, the issue here.
The issue isn't whether the PhysX accelerated features are better than if it was the same but not PhysX accelerated in terms of realism, the problem is that without the PhysX accelerated features, there is NO EFFECT AT ALL. When you take away even a basic version of something from people who don't have support for a certain feature, you are doing it wrong.
PhysX is supposed to improve immersion or whatever people claim, but it's not improving anything, it's resulting in the basic level of effect being completely removed. That's not improving anything at all. That's taking us back a step.

Funny...SirPauly goes for the ball...the red team goes for the man...buisness as usual.

Lonbjerg goes for the man, misses the forest for the trees.

 

[Erenhardt]

And Hair was in other games, too.

So, i guess we don't need AMD's TressFX for "realistic" hair. :sneaky:

And we need PhysX for realistic force field recharging? Wait what...?

 

[lavaheadache]

Why are we arguing about the need for these effects? I will take what ever effects devs want to throw at me. What I do believe is crap is artificial limitations.

I believe it is ok for Nvidia or Amd to make special effects that are catered to their cards. What I think is detrimental to progression is stupid acts like disabling these effects simply because a competitors hardware is present also. The fact that one can hack the limitations Nvidia put forth to stop add in PhysX effects on their own cards with zero side affects that allow Radeon card users to enjoy add in card PhysX card effects is slimy and does the community no good.

 

[notty22]

Keep reading there are no effects without physx enabled when firing on the force shield. Not true. There there, you know you fired. Those aren't scripted, so have a resource hit. Which is why they look better with physx. You can also enable cpu physX for a in-between effect, on hit's on the force shield.

 

[sontin]

You're missing the point. I don't think anyone is arguing PhysX effects don't look better than their CPU equivalents. The issue here is what developers did with PhysX off in Hawken is the equivalent of bald Lara.

No, it is comparing to the standard hair. What you see without GPU-PhysX is the standard in games today.

 

[Lonyo]

Keep reading there are no effects without physx enabled when firing on the force shield. Not true. There there, you know you fired. Those aren't scripted, so have a resource hit. Which is why they look better with physx. You can also enable cpu physX for a in-between effect, on hit's on the force shield.

I sure hope it's not an NV produced video, since the voiceover guy himself says there's no effects.

 

[notty22]

I sure hope it's not an NV produced video, since the voiceover guy himself says there's no effects.

So now you are going to deny what your eyes are seeing and play semantics and lie your way through a discussion?

edit: When PHYSx effects are OFF, there are NO PHYSx effects visible, is that clear enough?

 

[Dravonic]

So now you are going to deny what your eyes are seeing and play semantics and lie your way through a discussion?

edit: When PHYSx effects are OFF, there are NO PHYSx effects visible, is that clear enough?

We are talking about the blue swirling things, forget the yellow explosions. The blue swirly things can, to a certain extent, be replicated without PhysX.

 

[notty22]

We are talking about the blue swirling things, forget the yellow explosions. The blue swirly things can, to a certain extent, be replicated without PhysX.

Now we have the armchair programmers tell us what can be done and what can't. I thought there was NOTHING.
Can the direct compute unique type hair be done in Tombraider without a 20fps hit?

By the way, clearly there is a effect there.

 

[HurleyBird]

Seems like the best example of Nvidia PhysX to date, that's for sure. Those are some cool effects. Too bad it's proprietary.

 

[f1sherman]

I dig the smudged greasy look. I think it suits the game, but I'd love the option to sharpen it.

Love the smoke effects
oh and that gatling gun sound is just superb

 

[Erenhardt]

Now we have the armchair programmers tell us what can be done and what can't. I thought there was NOTHING.
Can the direct compute unique type hair be done in Tombraider without a 20fps hit?

By the way, clearly there is a effect there.

Didn't someone mention here that their GTX650Ti dedicated PhysX card is tanking in this game?
650Ti by itself should be enough to run most games in high details <fullHD, yet it has problems with running just a physx?

Software (physx) that works only on specific hardware is bad software.

I'm waiting for nv to emulate air molecules in their games. Hey, look! If you have NV card there is real time air participles simulation! You can't see it, but physX man!

 

[BallaTheFeared]

problems with running just a physx?

I don't think many of you understand why we have GPU only physics, or why cpu physics is complete crap compared to the GPU version.

Doing a lot of physics calculations on a lot of objects takes a lot of GPU power, and is impossible on modern cpus. Just look at how little a single char with more realistic hair (ponytail) impacted performance if you're confused about the efficiency of PhysX.