Physx is just a gimmick.

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: SirPauly
Hehe, I don't know those banners that for some have been "taken out" for the non-PhysX option, in the comparison video that Zogrim kindly offered for the community are not offered for the normal PhysX option as well. The high PhysX setting offers them. I just can't believe nVidia would do that to the consumer and is a cheap-shot -- considering they could of offered static representations of them for non-PhysX and normal PhysX users.

Now both sides are not innocent but nVidia really doesn't care about their customers as much as they should. From the other super long thread about disabling physx when any ATI product is found to not supporting XP64 despite full support promises before it was released.

I was so pissed (and still kind of am after dropping $$ on XP64) when I tried to use my 8800GTS. Back to 32-bit I went. Way to back out on a paying customer.

Physx is marketing really. They have taken elements out of games and tried to make us need physx to have a fully featured product. That's BS.

Scholzpdx, I'm not doubting you here, but could you please show us how you came to your conclustion that Batman Arkam Asylum has had content stripped out of it? I mean, I haven't seen the console version of this game and I'm wondering if those banners are hanging on the ceiling, if that fog is lingering about, or if all those papers are on the floors. Can you elaborate? Basically what I'm asking for is proof that content has been stripped out in order to make PhysX that much more attractive when enabled. Do you have a source that shows BAA before it was taken and had PhysX content added in? I'd like to see what the game would have looked like pre-PhysX.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: vj8usa
This actually hurts nvidia users as well, since not everyone will be able to handle the performance hit that's caused by enabling Physx. Now people with less powerful nvidia GPUs won't be able to compromise and have static smoke/sparks/etc with higher framerates either.
P.S. - those benchmarks are with a GTX295. Taken from here:
http://www.widescreengamingfor...hp/Batman_Benchmarking

Looks about right. I was running the demo on an 8800GTX and it looks great without physx but it starts to lag a bit when physx is on. I can't be angry at nvidia for that though since doing CPU physics would lag just as bad. If I'm using an 8800GTX still, you can probably guess that I'm not using an i7 CPU either; it would lag regardless of which component is trying to do these calculations.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: SirPauly
Hehe, I don't know those banners that for some have been "taken out" for the non-PhysX option, in the comparison video that Zogrim kindly offered for the community are not offered for the normal PhysX option as well. The high PhysX setting offers them. I just can't believe nVidia would do that to the consumer and is a cheap-shot -- considering they could of offered static representations of them for non-PhysX and normal PhysX users.

Now both sides are not innocent but nVidia really doesn't care about their customers as much as they should. From the other super long thread about disabling physx when any ATI product is found to not supporting XP64 despite full support promises before it was released.

I was so pissed (and still kind of am after dropping $$ on XP64) when I tried to use my 8800GTS. Back to 32-bit I went. Way to back out on a paying customer.

Physx is marketing really. They have taken elements out of games and tried to make us need physx to have a fully featured product. That's BS.

Scholzpdx, I'm not doubting you here, but could you please show us how you came to your conclustion that Batman Arkam Asylum has had content stripped out of it? I mean, I haven't seen the console version of this game and I'm wondering if those banners are hanging on the ceiling, if that fog is lingering about, or if all those papers are on the floors. Can you elaborate? Basically what I'm asking for is proof that content has been stripped out in order to make PhysX that much more attractive when enabled. Do you have a source that shows BAA before it was taken and had PhysX content added in? I'd like to see what the game would have looked like pre-PhysX.

As I don't have the demo installed on my PS3 I really couldn't tell you. I came to my conclusion due to the features just not being present. Without any reasonable doubt I can say that it would have taken them no time to add the movable environments. The banners literally could have been based off the same scripts as Batman's cape.

As for the newspaper on the ground, if Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 for the GameCube in 2001 could have similar paper effects then why couldn't BAA for the Pc in 2009 have them? It is absolutely ridiculous! 8 years later and after a console game a marketing team makes it so you can only have certain effects confined to a specific brand that was developed in years prior.

Its my personal opinion, but its impossible for me to think it could be otherwise.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Its my personal opinion, but its impossible for me to think it could be otherwise.

so there is nothing that we can say, do or demonstrate that would ever show you otherwise
OK .. i know when i am done

aloha

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Atechie

And static physics vs real physics?
Bye bye multiplayer...come on.

? All those "real physics" are purely aesthetic

How do banners, cape, and fog change the gameplay in any way? They dont

I agree completely this is Nv marketing at its best, or else we would have scalable settings, not "on or off"

And what I saw in the video didnt justify Physx anyway, it was nice, sure, but nothing that I havent seen before without the use of physx

The new Red Faction game with its destructible buildings impresses me alot more honestly

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Its my personal opinion, but its impossible for me to think it could be otherwise.

so there is nothing that we can say, do or demonstrate that would ever show you otherwise

Unless its solid, concrete evidence. Everything points to what I have came up with.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: apoppin

can you add your GTX 260+ as a secondary card dedicated to PhysX?

The performance drop isn?t caused by PhysX because I have it disabled. AFAICT it?s the icy sheen on the walls, and in larger areas it really makes things crawl. In any section where it?s possible to melt this ice, you can see the framerate dramatically rise when you do so.

Turning on PhysX would simply take more GPU resources away from rendering this ice and would slow down things even more.

... what kind of FPS are you getting?

Well under 30 FPS in many of the aforementioned sections.

 

[reallyscrued]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Scholzpdx, I'm not doubting you here, but could you please show us how you came to your conclustion that Batman Arkam Asylum has had content stripped out of it? I mean, I haven't seen the console version of this game and I'm wondering if those banners are hanging on the ceiling, if that fog is lingering about, or if all those papers are on the floors. Can you elaborate? Basically what I'm asking for is proof that content has been stripped out in order to make PhysX that much more attractive when enabled. Do you have a source that shows BAA before it was taken and had PhysX content added in? I'd like to see what the game would have looked like pre-PhysX.

Do people not watch the videos?

Or is there something I'm not getting?

 

[thilanliyan]

I just finished Star Wars: Force Unleashed. And for cloth effects that was really good. It uses Havok and something called Euphoria I think...and I'm guessing it's CPU based but it still looks really good.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: reallyscrued

Originally posted by: Keysplayr
Scholzpdx, I'm not doubting you here, but could you please show us how you came to your conclustion that Batman Arkam Asylum has had content stripped out of it? I mean, I haven't seen the console version of this game and I'm wondering if those banners are hanging on the ceiling, if that fog is lingering about, or if all those papers are on the floors. Can you elaborate? Basically what I'm asking for is proof that content has been stripped out in order to make PhysX that much more attractive when enabled. Do you have a source that shows BAA before it was taken and had PhysX content added in? I'd like to see what the game would have looked like pre-PhysX.

Do people not watch the videos?

Or is there something I'm not getting?

I did watch the video. But that does not tell me if the original (pre-PhysX enhancements) BAA had the cloth, fog, paper, etc. I've never seen the game prior to the video. Do you get what I am asking now? Scholzpdx keeps repeating that this content was stripped out of the game. I'd like verification of this. If his basis for the hanging cloth from the ceiling being stripped out of the game is that it looks stupid without it, how is that definitive?
Like I said, I just want to know what content BAA had prior to being enhanced by PhysX content. Did it have these objects or did it not? Are there console versions that shows this content?

I've just downloaded the BAA demo and will mess around with it a while, but this wont answer my questions. Anybody know for sure that the content was stripped out? Or was it never there to begin with? Need data, proof.

If the content was there, then that really sucks. I'll be the first to say it. But if it was never there to begin with, then it sucks that Scholzpdx is saying it was stripped out when it was never there. One way or the other, I'd like to know for sure.

 

[reallyscrued]

Ah I see what you're saying now. Yeah, the official word is that it is being "added" very late to the dev cycle and that's why PC gamers will have to wait until Sept 15 to get their hands on the game. But this doesn't help any in the fact that it's an nV showcase, they *are* taking extra time to put in the dynamic models, they may as well take the time to put in some static ones too.

And if you think the idea of Raven slobbering all over nV d**k has no ground, consider this: I just installed the demo and ATI users are unable to use MSAA through the games menus. Literally, this is what the screen shows.

...Basically if you run an ATI card, it will not let you apply any AA to the game. You have to enable AI in the catalyst control center and rename the executable to UT3.exe (a method which I still haven't been able to get working).

...Why can't I enable MSAA through the game's menus? I'm aware the UT3 engine has reservations about this...but if an nVidia 8000+ (two gen old) GPU can apply MSAA to an Unreal 3 game, so can any HD 4800s. And seriously, this is the first game I've seen that LABELS the method to be nVidia's technique.

In fact, a little searching has led me to the beyond3d forums, where someone changed the vendor ID of their ATI video card and enabled MSAA...guess what? It worked, no problem.

I feel like I'm derailing the topic, this was about PhysX, let me know if this belongs in a new thead. Lastly, there was a subtle new change to the intro videos of this game, but I don't think anyone noticed it. I sure did.

 

[vj8usa]

Originally posted by: reallyscrued
Ah I see what you're saying now. Yeah, the official word is that it is being "added" very late to the dev cycle and that's why PC gamers will have to wait until Sept 15 to get their hands on the game. But this doesn't help any in the fact that it's an nV showcase, they *are* taking extra time to put in the dynamic models, they may as well take the time to put in some static ones too.

And if you think the idea of Raven slobbering all over nV d**k has no ground, consider this: I just installed the demo and ATI users are unable to use MSAA through the games menus. Literally, this is what the screen shows.

...Basically if you run an ATI card, it will not let you apply any AA to the game. You have to enable AI in the catalyst control center and rename the executable to UT3.exe (a method which I still haven't been able to get working).

...Why can't I enable MSAA through the game's menus? I'm aware the UT3 engine has reservations about this...but if an nVidia 8000+ (two gen old) GPU can apply MSAA to an Unreal 3 game, so can any HD 4800s. And seriously, this is the first game I've seen that LABELS the method to be nVidia's technique.

In fact, a little searching has led me to the beyond3d forums, where someone changed the vendor ID of their ATI video card and enabled MSAA...guess what? It worked, no problem.

I feel like I'm derailing the topic, this was about PhysX, let me know if this belongs in a new thead. Lastly, there was a subtle new change to the intro videos of this game, but I don't think anyone noticed it. I sure did.

Try changing to bioshock.exe, that worked for me (with AI on). I ended up leaving AA off anyways, as it slows down a bit at 1680 for me with AA on.

 

[reallyscrued]

I tried bioshock.exe as well, didn't work. I'm using 9.6 Cats on WinXP x86, I'm going to update to 9.7 and report back.

I have a 4890 1 GB and I game at 1280x1024. I think I have the extra memory sitting around scratching its ass. Even 2x will be fine for me, god there's so many jaggies.

Holy shit, does driver cleaner cost money now?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: reallyscrued
I tried bioshock.exe as well, didn't work. I'm using 9.6 Cats on WinXP x86, I'm going to update to 9.7 and report back.

I have a 4890 1 GB and I game at 1280x1024. I think I have the extra memory sitting around scratching its ass. Even 2x will be fine for me, god there's so many jaggies.

Holy shit, does driver cleaner cost money now?

i believe DC does now
- Driver Sweeper is still free

aren't 9-8 Cats out?

 

[reallyscrued]

The website has up to 9-7 posted.

/major thread jack.

PHYSX IS A GIMMICK, STICK TO THE TOPIC PEOPLE.

 

[bimmerboy]

let me know if i am off topic as i do not want to derail this thread, but i read on another forum that they got the physx effects to work on the cpu with the batman demo. i'll post link if its appropriate. i think the discussion is on physx is an interesting one no doubt.

 

[reallyscrued]

You are able to turn on PhysX regardless of whether you have nVidia hardware or not. (I just wish the same was true about AA). There is nothing stopping you from running PhysX on your CPU, it's just not a very pleasant experience.

Are you saying that someone was able to run full PhysX without nVidia hardware and it ran smoothly?

BTW, I got AA to work with the news Cats, it runs up to 8x Box smoothly, the game looks like like a godamn CG movie if you aren't right up close to the screen. Ugh, I'm starting to like the UE3 engine.

 

[bimmerboy]

yes, from what i was reading and they displayed the different effects that i believe were mentioned earlier in this thread. would you like to take a look see shall i pm you the link?

edit:
im referring to this one demo in particular just so that i am clear and not saying that all games with physx can be altered in this way

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: bimmerboy
let me know if i am off topic as i do not want to derail this thread, but i read on another forum that they got the physx effects to work on the cpu with the batman demo. i'll post link if its appropriate. i think the discussion is on physx is an interesting one no doubt.

where did you hear that? its certainly not true unless you consider 5-7 fps playable. and yes I have tried it.

 

[vj8usa]

I tried PhysX on "normal" and I was getting 10-30FPS when triggering PhysX effects like the paper or tile damage. That was with my very weak CPU. Maybe a heavily OCed i7 can handle it playably?

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: vj8usa
I tried PhysX on "normal" and I was getting 10-30FPS when triggering PhysX effects like the paper or tile damage. That was with my very weak CPU. Maybe a heavily OCed i7 can handle it playably?

no it cant. there is really little difference between normal and high. high basically just adds the tearable cloth in that room from what I have seen. you certainly didnt average 10-30 on that E2160 because my E8500 couldnt not come close to that.


EDIT: apparently high must do more than i thought. with all very high settings and physx on high I got 6-8 fps with 11 being the highest. lowering it to normal I got 12-18 fps with 21 being the highest.