Gameguru Mania

ggrobot · Elite Member Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 53567

Earlier this week,

Havok sounded off on physics usage in Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter specifically dealing with AGEIA's PhysX card. In particular Havok cited claims by users of lower frame rates once PhysX was applied to the game.

In this article AGEIA responds to the FPS reports, as well as clarifying

Read more...

Source: GGMania headlines
GGMania.com - Daily Gaming and Tech news

xxxx · Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 7:51 am Post subject:

El_Coyote · Elite Member Joined: 09 Jun 2004 Posts: 611

consider havoc rendering 100 physics objects in a scene.
Then consider Ageia redndering 1000.
Those objects still have to be rendered by the graphics card too(not fun with 1000's of invisible physics objects), so of course theres going to be a hit on the framerate.

the hit on performance however, is nothing compared to what havoc would drain of ressources if it had to do the same amount of work.(not even counting that those objects would have to be rendered by the gfx too)

Nosferatu · Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 10:57 am Post subject:

The fact that Havok charges 100's of thousands of dollars for their software and Ageia provides the PhysX SDK for free could be a very strong point. That's considering Ageia also has bits of code ready for developers to implement certain effects. You almost have to find a place in a game where this would be useful and fits well and... plug it in. However maybe I'm wrong, but... I have a feeling Ageia won't die, that they are on the right way.

Sabot · Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 2:01 pm Post subject:

This physX....... is just old-hat. We've had deformation and fully destructable environments for years in games! That is why AGEIA will fall flat. A load of sparkly visual effects -rendered by a PPU- is just not doing anything original for games today.

GAMEPLAY is number one , not a tech demo with a free game attached.

We've also been playing HAVOK based games with no complaint from the community -how much MORE do you want? Last i read is gamers wanting originality in games and less of the bull****!!

When we have games that return to the 'old days' of quality time then we can think about improving upon it with PhysX (or whatever exists) Instead of this 8hour gameplay and then tart it up (or is it keep the empty player awake) with a whole load of pyrotechnics.

Easily amused is getting contagious.

lmer · Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 2:29 pm Post subject:

IMHO, we'll soon see games with excesive explosion/particle effects and physics affected water surfaces, sh*t like that. And in all that excess..this hardware will find it's use. But when the Oohs and Aahhs go thin, the developers will cut down on exageration, and purpose of this hardware will go thin.

Because, theres just not very much *more* you can do with physics. At this time we allready have pretty complex physics engines which affect a great deal of the enviroments. Soon we'll have faster CPU's or maybe that GPU physics implementation everyone is talking about, and there will be enough power for the fully evolved physics engines. AFter that, there isn't really much more space for physics, right?

So, yeah, i think that buying this overpriced piece of hardware is really STUPID. But hx is gonna have to buy it either way for reviewing most of the upcomming crap. Razz

// EDIT

Oh, by the way, Stumpus said it. We've had most of the features this HW advertises for years, powered by our CPUs. We can really only go over the top now.

DELETED · Guest

DELETED

Sabot · Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 5:09 pm Post subject:

Oh billie put a cock in it, as you can see we talk more sense than you.

Your theory is lying burning all over your hand-made shoes -as can be noted from the actual test http://www.techamok.com/?pid=829 regarding the wonders of a hardware and software test ; oh shock of shocks! Software spanks the hardware PPUs ass. This is just not on, if you bought a graphics card that premiered with such shocking results thee would be law suits left-right & centre.

You sure you weren't involved with AGEIA? I mean it's just like you to talk-the-talk

As for theory,You know what that did? stuck it's ass out the window and waved goodbye Cool

So as you where saying? "Ladies and Gentlemen; Bill has left the building with a timely software crash" Nothing new there eh Laughing

xxxx · Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 5:04 am Post subject:

As I said. The card is a crock. It does nothing for gaming. Maybe if the card was $50, I'd consider it just for thrills but at the price they are asking.. Take a hike!

DELETED · Guest

DELETED

Sabot · Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 5:45 pm Post subject:

Bill don't get your knickers in a twist Rolling Eyes

i was returning the patronising bull**** that you have thrown back at us; Calling us "ladies" isn't a personal attack then? Yeah your big to dish out the crap but oops can't handle a wee bit in return... By the way "put a cock in it" is a twist on "put a sock in it" -if your old enough then you should know the fun side of that slang....
The rest of the slagging goes for calling yourself 'Bill Gates' (in my post; "hand made shoes" another piss take as Bill always promises but never delivers and always sounds so damn patronising...)

RE: deformable terrain etc 'Far Cry' left craters in the sand when you threw a grenade (deformation it is)
'Soldiers Heroes of WW2' 2004 had full deformable everything! Buildings,trees,telgraph poles,vehicles and terrain could be deformed or completely destroyed one way or the other. You could bring a building down wall-by-wall,floor-by-floor untill it was just rubble with tank rounds.

So yes we've had deformation for while. whether it's one or two games it's still been done.

lmer · Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 6:48 pm Post subject:

Actually the first game, i think, that had deformable geometry was the first hitman back in 2000. In that one mission where you come to kill the narc boss in the jungle, the plants have deformable leaves when you pass trough them. Plus you two girls need to get laid ASAP.