Comments on: Music Is My Hot PhysX

By: sicakiliski

sicakiliski — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:21:00 +0000

Adult film izle
thanks admin

By: Lu-Tze

Lu-Tze — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 09:49:28 +0000

“Would be interesting to hear from Lu Tze on this, though.”

I think this comes under the domain of “things I really shouldn’t comment on if I want to keep my job”.

I’ll stick to stuff like “Isn’t GTAIV awesome?”.

By: malkav11

malkav11 — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 07:32:05 +0000

Physics cards didn’t catch on because, with no install base, it mostly hasn’t been worth developer time to take advantage of them (plus they increased the amount of rendering the GPU had to do, most of the time, which resulted in little if any net improvement.). And who’s going to spend $300 or whatever ridiculous sum they were priced at when they don’t actually *do* anything in most situations.

GPU-based physics (/secondary GPU cards dedicated to physics) offer the advantage of being something everyone’s already buying, so that developers can reasonably expect those capabilities to be present (or at least widely available.). I’d look forward to it if it weren’t for the tiny fact that I’m currently running a pair of 7-series cards that aren’t compatible. There’s been no need to upgrade, with everything I’ve wanted to run operating swimmingly at high settings. Oblivion, Bioshock, Mass Effect, etc. Crysis I’ve been avoiding, but other than that, everything.

By: Al3xand3r

Al3xand3r — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 04:32:13 +0000

Doesn’t PhysX also support Havok?

By: Sucram

Sucram — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:08:28 +0000

I find the move towards divergent feature sets between ATi and NVIDIA cards disappointing.

DX10 was meant to put and end to this (and might have if t weren’t for the DX10.1 debacle), now both companies and talking about GPGPU’s and Physics but using different API’s and with NVIDIA supporting PhysX while AMD goes with Havok.

It’s another nightmare for developers and one which means they still can’t fully integrate fancy physics into their gameplay.

By: Gap Gen

Gap Gen — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 21:25:15 +0000

I think the main difference is that the basic theories behind graphics and physics are well understood, but we have no idea how to make a real AI

By: Erlam

Erlam — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:45:55 +0000

I think we need to get the fuck away from the graphics/physics optimization, and focus on A.I., because honestly, what the hell is different in games now from, say, 8 years ago?

The A.I. still kamikaze charges you, they have almost no idea how to actually use cover; but don’t worry, it looks really realistic when you grenade the NPC stuck looking at a table.

By: Vivian

Vivian — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:36:51 +0000

CSS aren’t terrible, they’re great – just a bit rammed down peoples throats of late. I especially liked how many people loved lets make love etc but had never heard of death from above.

lovefoxx is a bit chubby though.

By: Gap Gen

Gap Gen — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:57:50 +0000

Well, it’s a big thing for immersion. Euphoria’s system will presumably make things seem more realistic in terms of character actions and so on.

By: SuperNashwan

SuperNashwan — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:45:46 +0000

But does “more” physics really mean anything for game design? I can’t say I’ve played a game recently and wished for more stuff bouncing around hyper-realistically.

By: Gap Gen

Gap Gen — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:39:44 +0000

Well, the reason graphics cards are good is because they’re specifically designed to do what they do (remember software graphics?), which can also apply to physics. So you do get more bang for your buck with graphics cards. The main reason physics cards didn’t pick up was because there was no market for it.

By: Al3xand3r

Al3xand3r — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:06:36 +0000

Yeah, obviously, but if you already have the 10 taxis and are paying for them, why not use them instead of hire someone extra, like the coach, while you keep paying for the taxis you don’t use on top of that? That’s the analogy I was trying to make, it’s not like we’ll be able to chose to buy single or dual core cpus that are still supported and efficient when 8 or 16 core cpus are the standard…

Thanks for making it easier to get my point accross…

I just see that multi core technology keeps advancing but only in regards to hardware, didn’t they recently unveil that like, infinite core CPU or whatever (yeah, not infinite, but an absurd number)?

Both PPU usage and multi core usage is at its infancy in regards to how much games actually benefit from them but I think that there’s more benefit to be had in the long term from multi core processing with how rapidly the number of cores will be extended and yet developers aren’t pushing for it…