New Mafia II PhysX ON/OFF video.

[Red Storm]

Or even basic HL2 and all of its mods. CS:S or using the gravity gun.

This. For all the talk PhysX gets it still hasn't even delivered something that Half Life 2 showcased almost 6 years ago (as far as I can tell? Please correct me if I am wrong).

 

[Keysplayr]

This. For all the talk PhysX gets it still hasn't even delivered something that Half Life 2 showcased almost 6 years ago (as far as I can tell? Please correct me if I am wrong).

I'm sure you can tell us where a gravity gun has a place in 1930's Mob wars. Cause you know, every crime boss back then had at least 3 grav guns in their arsenals. They kept them between the tommys and the gatling guns.

Seriously though, as I have stated earlier, We've come a long way from HL2. Batman AA was the first real breakthrough with active/reactive mists/fog. And other things, but I'd just be repeating myself. Go back a few posts, it's there.

 

[extra]

Nvidia's stance on PhysX reminds me a lot of 3dfx's "glide". Potentially superior in technical aspects, but destined to fail in the end because no game developer is going to willfully limit their market share. Sad that Nvidia can't learn from the past, even when they bought 3dfx in the end.

This...sort of.
Yes, it does remind one a lot of GLIDE.
In that yeah, it'll be replaced I'm sure, with an open solution.
However, it's also like GLIDE in a good way...it's gotten people into gpu-accelerated physics.
If Nvidia really wanted to be smart, here's what they'd do imho:

1. Let anyone support physx, open it on the hardware support side. (ie, AMD could implement it on their graphics cards for no cost, Intel could optimize it for their cpus at no cost, etc).

2. Let games use the physx API for no cost.

3. Develop really, really, exceptional tools and libraries for implementing physx based effects in games and other programs. Charge for these, they'd be licensed. Ie if you were a game developer you'd use nvidia's tool and they'd get a cut of every game sold (or pay a larger up front fee, or whatever, like licensing a game engine). Develop the best physics tools for consoles, cell phones, etc. Tons of money could be made, they'd get good PR, etc...win/win.

 

[Red Storm]

I'm sure you can tell us where a gravity gun has a place in 1930's Mob wars. Cause you know, every crime boss back then had at least 3 grav guns in their arsenals. They kept them between the tommys and the gatling guns.

Seriously though, as I have stated earlier, We've come a long way from HL2. Batman AA was the first real breakthrough with active/reactive mists/fog. And other things, but I'd just be repeating myself. Go back a few posts, it's there.

Oh please, we both know Mafia 2 would have been so much better with a gravity gun.

But you know exactly what I mean. I want to be able to blow something up, sending rocks and other debris flying that can potentially hit something and damage/kill it. I want to be able to use that same debris as cover. Things like this will go a long ways to increasing the immersion factor in games, making them more believable.

We have come a long way visually, but Half Life 2 had actual, game play affecting physics, while Batman had much better visuals that - while they may have also reacted to you - were still only visuals. You can't honestly compare nicer looking fog and mist to the gravity gun in HL2.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I'm sure you can tell us where a gravity gun has a place in 1930's Mob wars. Cause you know, every crime boss back then had at least 3 grav guns in their arsenals. They kept them between the tommys and the gatling guns.

Seriously though, as I have stated earlier, We've come a long way from HL2. Batman AA was the first real breakthrough with active/reactive mists/fog. And other things, but I'd just be repeating myself. Go back a few posts, it's there.

When someone brings up a good point you just play it off as a joke...

Obviously it was directed at the environment and usage, not the gravity gun itself. In HL2, you shoot something and it moves in a very realistic manner to how you shot it. You bump something and it moves realistically. The "ragdoll" effects are very good in it too...

... and it played flawlessly on a Pentium 4 2.6ghz and an x600.

Physx isnt necessary. It really isnt. We're seeing more of the same with an immense performance hit. The GTX 280 is like what, 1Tflop? A TERAFLOP and it struggles with physx. But a Pentium 4 with Havok still doens't have any issues. Hmm... :whiste:

 

[NoQuarter]

For those who are pro PhysX, let me ask you something. Did HL 2 need GPU PhysX to implement that nifty gravity gun into the game? Has GPU PhysX managed to add anything as compelling and interesting as that gravity gun into any game?

That's the kind of compelling game feature that I would like to see added to games with GPU or CPU physics, but so far all GPU PhysX effects seem to be overdone eye candy.

Yep an A quality game won't use GPU PhysX because they'll have a good CPU physics implementation and a B quality game will be ripe for nVidia to come in and add GPU only effects.

Physics for eye-candy is great too though. Current stuff is kinda overblown effects though.

 

[Keysplayr]

When someone brings up a good point you just play it off as a joke...

Obviously it was directed at the environment and usage, not the gravity gun itself. In HL2, you shoot something and it moves in a very realistic manner to how you shot it. You bump something and it moves realistically. The "ragdoll" effects are very good in it too...

... and it played flawlessly on a Pentium 4 2.6ghz and an x600.

Physx isnt necessary. It really isnt. We're seeing more of the same with an immense performance hit. The GTX 280 is like what, 1Tflop? A TERAFLOP and it struggles with physx. But a Pentium 4 with Havok still doens't have any issues. Hmm... :whiste:

Are you really going to sit there and type that the graphics burden was the same in HL2 as it is in a new title? Use PhysX for HL2 and that grav gun, and get 1000 fps. You aren't thinking logically about this at all.
PhysX isn't necessary? Well, then neither is Tesselation, or anti-aliasing, or anistropic filtering, Ambient Occlusion, Bloom, soft shadows. I can keep going, but eventually I'll get to Atari Pong level graphics.

And by the way, you aren't reading the whole thread. You're skimming. I've already commented on the HL2 grav gun many posts back. This time around, I'd thought about it humorously instead of completely repeating myself. If you don't read the whole thread, it's not my problem.

 

[Red Storm]

Are you really going to sit there and type that the graphics burden was the same in HL2 as it is in a new title? Use PhysX for HL2 and that grav gun, and get 1000 fps. You aren't thinking logically about this at all.
PhysX isn't necessary? Well, then neither is Tesselation, or anti-aliasing, or anistropic filtering, Ambient Occlusion, Bloom, soft shadows. I can keep going, but eventually I'll get to Atari Pong level.

Well at least you're on the right track. Those are all eye-candy, PhysX included.

The Gravity gun was actual physics at work/play.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well at least you're on the right track. Those are all eye-candy, PhysX included.

According to Scholzpdx, we don't need any.

 

[Keysplayr]

According to Scholzpdx, we don't need any.

BTW, Unreal III had a "version" of a grav gun.

 

[taltamir]

Don't forget Portal and its future sequel, imho one of the most interesting new step into the unknown that gaming has taken in a long time.

mmm, interesting, according to wikipedia "Source uses a heavily tweaked version of the Havok physics engine."
So portal DOES use havok.

Red Faction/Battlefield

I don't know about battlefield, but red faction is a game from 2001 that used the GeoMod engine for destructible environments...
also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_(series)
lots of battlefields, which one specifically?

 

[zerocool84]

mmm, interesting, according to wikipedia "Source uses a heavily tweaked version of the Havok physics engine."
So portal DOES use havok.



I don't know about battlefield, but red faction is a game from 2001 that used the GeoMod engine for destructible environments...
also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_(series)
lots of battlefields, which one specifically?

Red Faction: Guerrilla and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 specifically.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Are you really going to sit there and type that the graphics burden was the same in HL2 as it is in a new title? Use PhysX for HL2 and that grav gun, and get 1000 fps. You aren't thinking logically about this at all.
PhysX isn't necessary? Well, then neither is Tesselation, or anti-aliasing, or anistropic filtering, Ambient Occlusion, Bloom, soft shadows. I can keep going, but eventually I'll get to Atari Pong level graphics.

According to Scholzpdx, we don't need any.

Physx. I said PHYSX. PHYSX. Not physic effects. Get it? Twist my words all you want, but Physx is not offering anything in games that's a game changer. AA, AF, bloom, all of that have nothing to do with my post. They work on all GPU platforms. Havok, which runs on all modern systems is actually making games more immersive, not limiting or crippled. It's also been around a lot longer and doesn't require a useless PPU/CUDA card.

So go ahead, get down to atari pong level graphics. As long as nVidia sponsors it, maybe you'll be able to get a sneak peek and tell every one of us about it! Wouldn't that be great!?

Edit: Oh, really? 1000 fps if HL2 used Physx? You're just becoming ridiculous.

And by the way, you aren't reading the whole thread. You're skimming. I've already commented on the HL2 grav gun many posts back. This time around, I'd thought about it humorously instead of completely repeating myself. If you don't read the whole thread, it's not my problem.

And skimming is against the rules or something? Do you see how ridiculously long this thread is? You try and get on my case about not reading the ENTIRE thread, yet cant even read my post right.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I find it funny, that the video with physx on/off reminds me about 3d mark 2001 where in the hall scene there was similar effect displayed...bunch of wall debris and shells spraying around (i think it used havoc and it runs at 50fps on ibm t41 from 2004: single core 1.6ghz with ati radeon 7500 dx7 card). To think, that 10 years after, with all this power at hand, you need a special gpu to do almost the same, is just ridiculous. SW developers of mafia II could do the same and much better on the cpu...using havok or physx...of course if they would want to. In other words, the whole issue at hand is a PR. Anyone who believes different has a false consciousness...like believing that using shampoo against hair loss will stop you going bald.

I find it funny that you compare a scripted (useless) synthetic DX8 benchmark (with dead debris) to interactive game physics in the DX10/11 era :biggrin:

But it nice to see you post, and people pat your back, because this is the "root of all evil" in this PhysX-hetz:

Argumentation based on ignorance.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Physx. I said PHYSX. PHYSX. Not physic effects. Get it? Twist my words all you want, but Physx is not offering anything in games that's a game changer.

That is either a lie or a fallacy...which one is it?

 

[Caribbean Geek]

That is either a lie or a fallacy...which one is it?

According to whom?

I find it funny that you compare a scripted (useless) synthetic DX8 benchmark (with dead debris) to interactive game physics in the DX10/11 era :biggrin:

But it nice to see you post, and people pat your back, because this is the "root of all evil" in this PhysX-hetz:

Argumentation based on ignorance.

Yeah, I can see that, specially when there's only two DX10/DX11 tittles which uses GPU accelerated PhysX which are Cryostasis and Metro 2033. Way to go to push technology!!!

Cryostasis with its bugged PhysX implementations ressembling a poltergeist effect and Metro 2033 subpar debris and smoke effect, that's simply pathettic, argumentation based on ignorance.

 

[Keysplayr]

And skimming is against the rules or something? Do you see how ridiculously long this thread is? You try and get on my case about not reading the ENTIRE thread, yet cant even read my post right.

You got on "my" case because you didn't read the thread. You said:

"When someone brings up a good point you just play it off as a joke... "

So, because you did not read the thread, and would have plainly saw my previous, non-humorous comment if you did, I get wrongly accused by you saying I'm playing it off as a joke. Yes, the uninformed one. Off the cuff remarks without knowing all your info. Oh, and I read your post just fine.

 

[Lonbjerg]

According to whom?

According to you...I experienced physics altering game play for the frist time in 2006 (Cellfactor), so either you are postualing from ingorance (a fallacy) or you have made you mind up about willfully ignoring facts (a lie).

Yesterday I spent a couple of hours burning tires in Mafia 2 and the exiting the car and playing around with the interactive smoke with my character...added a whole new dimension to that game.

Yeah, I can see that, specially when there's only two DX10/DX11 tittles which uses GPU accelerated PhysX which are Cryostasis and Metro 2033. Way to go to push technology!!!

I think you should do a recount and then come back again...ignorance is a bad foundation...and a waste of everyone elses time.

Cryostasis with its bugged PhysX implementations ressembling a poltergeist effect and Metro 2033 subpar debris and smoke effect, that's simply pathettic, argumentation based on ignorance.

Piot, calling the kettle black eh?
How about you show us some better (none-scripted) effects...so we can jugde for our selfes...because your words don't hold much facts in them?

Wanna bet you come up with nothing?

 

[Scali]

I also believe AMD contacted nvidia to try to port PhysX to OpenCL or maybe Compute like AMD with Intel's Havok and nVidia may of said no.

The way I understood it, nVidia offered AMD help to implement PhysX on their hardware.
The problem was that AMD would have to make some sort of Cuda-to-Stream/OpenCL wrapper, or rewrite pretty much the entire library.
AMD probably refused because they didn't have the resources, and even if they did, they'd always be at a disadvantage, as neither Stream nor OpenCL are on parity with Cuda in terms of programmability and features.
nVidia will always have its own Cuda-optimized version, tuned to their latest hardware.

 

[Scali]

For those who are pro PhysX, let me ask you something. Did HL 2 need GPU PhysX to implement that nifty gravity gun into the game? Has GPU PhysX managed to add anything as compelling and interesting as that gravity gun into any game?

That's the dilemma we're facing here.
Rigid body physics are the 'low hanging fruit' of physics, and that was already done years ago, with games like Max Payne 2 and Half-Life 2.
Things like water were still fake, and there were very few soft bodies (okay, there was the odd chunky matress in HL2) and no cloth effects.
These effects are much more computationally expensive, but at the same time also harder to implement in gameplay directly (especially since most of it has already been adequately faked with rigid bodies, which is deemed 'good enough' by most gamers, apparently).

 

[Keysplayr]

First game to ever really impress me with physics was Painkiller. I believed that used Havok. One of the fist games I noted that used Havok. I thought it was great. Partially destructible environments, but mostly restricted to free standing bodies such as wagon carts, pieces of wood, scaffolding, hanging signs. And the ragdoll effects were very new to me and quite cool.

 

[taltamir]

speaking of ragdoll... i never liked it, it doesn't look anything like a person, it looks like a rag doll. Holliwood went from using rag dolls to CGI that looks like people years ago. (because when you throw a rag doll off a building and film it, it looks totally fake)

 

[Caribbean Geek]

According to you...I experienced physics altering game play for the frist time in 2006 (Cellfactor), so either you are postualing from ingorance (a fallacy) or you have made you mind up about willfully ignoring facts (a lie).

You mean that everyone in this forum has to accept your opinion as a fact? Please, I experienced Cellfactors too and I still having my AGEIA card which I used to play Mirrors Edge, Batman AA, Darkvoid (Crappy game), Cryostasis (Another crappy game), so don't lecture me kid because I've been in the computer scene for more than 15 years, pretty much your current age. You stated this;

"I find it funny that you compare a scripted (useless) synthetic DX8 benchmark (with dead debris) to interactive game physics in the DX10/11 era"

And I stated that's a lie because there's only two games which uses DX10/DX11 because most games that uses GPU accelerated PhysX are DX9, so much for nVidia pushing the technology. Am I lying?, go to Physxinfo.com and educate yourself child.

Yesterday I spent a couple of hours burning tires in Mafia 2 and the exiting the car and playing around with the interactive smoke with my character...added a whole new dimension to that game.

I also have Mafia 2 and I removed the Cloth folder to enable APEX on medium and looks fine, but I don't call rubber made debris inmersive at all, want inmersiveness? Play Batman AA, that's the only tittle that PhysX ever made a difference in eye candy, but not in playability.

I think you should do a recount and then come back again...ignorance is a bad foundation...and a waste of everyone elses time.

I think you should stop with the attacks, I've reported all of them and probably will get a warning if you keep going, you look childish taking nVidia cards too seriously, they're just hardware, they won't hug you and tell you I love you, so please, stay on topic and stop with the attacks.

 

[Kenmitch]

I think you should stop with the attacks, I've reported all of them and probably will get a warning if you keep going, you look childish taking nVidia cards too seriously, they're just hardware, they won't hug you and tell you I love you, so please, stay on topic and stop with the attacks.

I noticed how you didn't mention they don't keep you warm at night....As we all know they do

I'm still with the leave it crowd....When and if it's a must have then I'll reconsider.

 

[taserbro]

You mean that everyone in this forum has to accept your opinion as a fact? Please, I experienced Cellfactors too and I still having my AGEIA card which I used to play Mirrors Edge, Batman AA, Darkvoid (Crappy game), Cryostasis (Another crappy game), so don't lecture me kid because I've been in the computer scene for more than 15 years, pretty much your current age. You stated this;

No, but anyone on this forums is capable to judging his opinion based on the merits of the evidence he brought forth. That aside, I don't think he was addressing you when he referred to cellfactor, a title very conveniently ignored for the purpose of broadening the generalization that no title has ever made use of physx in gameplay; moreover, you having played it doesn't refute his point that people keep painting physx with an overly broad brush and seem to have no problem with using misinformation as long as it suits their views.

And I stated that's a lie because there's only two games which uses DX10/DX11 because most games that uses GPU accelerated PhysX are DX9, so much for nVidia pushing the technology. Am I lying?, go to Physxinfo.com and educate yourself child.

False dichotomy. Sticking with Dx9 hardly prevents anyone from innovating in technology. You can do both, either or none. In fact, I'd like to hear how any dx11 features have more potential to revolutionize gameplay than hardware accelerated physics... Again, one has nothing to do with the other in this context but so far dx11 has failed to impress me far more often than hardware physics 3 years ago.

As for nvidia (or any companies of this caliber at this point) not innovating, I'll only point out that if you were to take away all the technologies that nvidia brought up from proprietary tech demo to industry standard, you'd be left with a very pale carcass of what games look like today.

I also have Mafia 2 and I removed the Cloth folder to enable APEX on medium and looks fine, but I don't call rubber made debris inmersive at all, want inmersiveness? Play Batman AA, that's the only tittle that PhysX ever made a difference in eye candy, but not in playability.

Define what you would call immersive. Lest we move to the flavor of the day of no-true-Scotsman fallacy, you're going to have one hell of a time squarely disproving a subjective view held by someone else. I happen to agree that some of the mafia 2 effects were lackluster and pointlessly resource intensive (other than the destructible and interactive objects; those were quite promising) but that doesn't make his preference any less valid.

I think you should stop with the attacks, I've reported all of them and probably will get a warning if you keep going, you look childish taking nVidia cards too seriously, they're just hardware, they won't hug you and tell you I love you, so please, stay on topic and stop with the attacks.

There's plenty of calls of skepticism towards others' qualifications for commenting on this topic (whether justified or not) but you're among the few who resorted to ad hominems, ironically in the same post you condemned them. Frankly, while I filter those out rather efficiently nowadays, I still think it does your stance a disservice and while you may not really care of what I think, I'd wager I'm not the only one in that camp.
If his stance is really as fragile as you claim, then it should be easy for you to convince everyone without making this weird.