New Mafia II PhysX ON/OFF video.

[Daedalus685]

So it isnt Physics, it is who is pushing it. I see......

That is not what I said at all.... I'm baffled you could pull that from what you quoted...

The point is that the "no physX" option is far less nice looking than average physics in a regular game. It is an artificial delta that bothers people.. not PhysX or nvidia (though that does for different reasons).

Many feel what we have looks just as good as physX... so they don't see the restrictions worth it. At the least the benefit is small but the fact that all effects are off without physX makes the boost artificially high (a la all marketing ever).

 

[BenSkywalker]

The point is that the "no physX" option is far less nice looking than average physics in a regular game.

Spend a decent amount of time driving in the game. The vehicle/driving physics are actually shockingly good- I would love to hear of a non racing game that can compare honestly(hell, for that matter some of the racing games I've played lately weren't even as good- GRiD I'm looking at you ).

 

[Daedalus685]

Spend a decent amount of time driving in the game. The vehicle/driving physics are actually shockingly good- I would love to hear of a non racing game that can compare honestly(hell, for that matter some of the racing games I've played lately weren't even as good- GRiD I'm looking at you ).

Well they are good, don't get me wrong.. but the "eye candy" effects are what folks care about. All of the real world game play stuff is on the cpu by default anyway.

The problem is that in a comparison "with" and "without" the "without" looks far worse than something like crysis due to how the devs obviously added no eye candy in it at all. This is all well and good but it is not a solid comparison of physX. It is simply a marketing ploy, a very common one at that.

This is what bothers people.. we have videos 'proving' hysX adds things yet the comparison of the without makes no attempt to, a la crytech, add the same effects by other means.

I have no doubt PhysX is better than the average game.. but we don't get that comparison from this kind of evidence.

 

[golem]

That is not what I said at all.... I'm baffled you could pull that from what you quoted...

The point is that the "no physX" option is far less nice looking than average physics in a regular game. It is an artificial delta that bothers people.. not PhysX or nvidia (though that does for different reasons).

Many feel what we have looks just as good as physX... so they don't see the restrictions worth it. At the least the benefit is small but the fact that all effects are off without physX makes the boost artificially high (a la all marketing ever).

A lot of times, when people complain about Nvidia "restricting" games on ATI, another game in a different category is used as an example of a regular game. Mafia 2 is a sandlot game that was ported from consoles. Can you give examples of other console sandlot games that have better looking physics?

Crysis is not a fair example, it's a different genre of game and it was originally developed on the PC without the restrictions in place from being developed for use on consoles.

I haven't compared, but does Mafia 2 on ATI PC look worse than on the consoles?

 

[BenSkywalker]

This is what bothers people.. we have videos 'proving' hysX adds things yet the comparison of the without makes no attempt to, a la crytech, add the same effects by other means.

You can run it on the CPU? Most people discount the cloth, while I personally think it is one of the more impressive technical elements of this game, it isn't noticeable enough during gameplay and hence it is something that you can disable and then enable everything else you see in those videos *without a PhysX supporting card*.

I haven't compared, but does Mafia 2 on ATI PC look worse than on the consoles?

You should be able to enable Apex level physics, minus the cloth, on any ATi based PC with decent performance and it isn't even close to the consoles. In all honesty I bought this game for the PC instead of the consoles *because* of the extra shit nV paid to get in this game and all of the most impressive parts of that work on ATi hardware *no problem*. The most impressive elements of this game are in the amount of detail everywhere in the city, not any one thing, the overall level of detail everywhere and the little touches that they took the time to put in even though they would be almost entirely wasted(after beating the game I took time to wander way outside of the story line areas and was amazed to see highly detailed areas ~ a mile or so away from anything to do with the actual game with NPCs performing tasks appropriate for the area and everything included).

Little touches like the snow blowing off the roof of the cars as very fine powder when you cross a certain speed, something everyone from the snow belt can identify as evidence of a relatively fresh snowfall and very cold temperatures, are the types of things that make this game really stand out. Honestly the focus on the demo and the quite frankly bad PhysX on display in the segment with the road is disappointing, really detracts from the perception of the game is IMO. I think if they wanted to make a good video, they would make on of when they trash the 'greasers' little diner, far more impressive and accurate IMO.

 

[golem]

Not technicaly but others will get the meaning of it.



The problem is when you take away a giveme like bullets and fragment etc. without the use of physX it just seems like waste of the technology! Or a penalty for not being on the Green team.

I'm not looking for a pissing match with you. I downloaded the beta drivers and was looking for a physX card to play around with my 5850 with hybrid physX as some of the features looked kinda cool to me. I have an open mind and am willing to try new things. My mind is not set in any particular way. I don't have an undieing love for the Red or Green team....But once I thought about it I just couldn't get myself to support nvidia's selfishness.

Just saying that physX could be put to alot better use than bullets, fragments etc. The biggest problem is it's a one sided proprietary technology that doesn't need to be. Not sure who the first game developer is gonna be to shoot themselves in the foot and fully utilize the technology.

As long as physX is a one sided technology it belongs in a CONSOLE and not the PC

That's the problem I have with this argument. It's was developed on the console and ported over to the PC, are is almost all games nowadays.

If the PC version looks worse than the console version, then bitch away because Nvidia took away something. But if what Nvidia funded improved graphics in general, and improved it even more if you have an Nvidia card then what are you complaining about?

ATI users at not entitled to "extras" that Nvidia funded. It's not selfish for Nvidia to restrict improvements they funded to their consumers, it's just business. It's not a penalty for the red team if the extra wouldn't have been there in the first place if not for Nvidia funding, it's a bonus for the green team that was paid for when the card was purchased.

 

[stag3]

Well, that's what you're supposed to do. Watch your enemies. PhysX content just offers another factor of immersion, conscious of it or not. You could have easily played the game with PhysX OFF, but you didn't. Especially with a 5850, you leave PhysX to run on the CPU. Your framerates would have been higher, but you still left PhysX on? Or did you shut it off early on in the game and played that way?

whatever the default is, i changed only the resolution.
i thought physx was nvidia only, ati cards don't get it do they ?

 

[Keysplayr]

One step forward and two steps backward is still a step backward .
I set a lot of stone when I did landscaping in high school. It doesn't look or react like that, plain and simple. Also, it's illegal to discharge a firearm within the vicinity of a roadway, that's a rudimentary firearm law.

So, we both really don't know then. Neither of us has shot one.
And about firearm laws? Do you really think I needed schooling on it? I don't own any. Don't like them.
But, try schooling the Mafia II guys about that.

 

[ModestGamer]

That's the problem I have with this argument. It's was developed on the console and ported over to the PC, are is almost all games nowadays.

If the PC version looks worse than the console version, then bitch away because Nvidia took away something. But if what Nvidia funded improved graphics in general, and improved it even more if you have an Nvidia card then what are you complaining about?

ATI users at not entitled to "extras" that Nvidia funded. It's not selfish for Nvidia to restrict improvements they funded to their consumers, it's just business. It's not a penalty for the red team if the extra wouldn't have been there in the first place if not for Nvidia funding, it's a bonus for the green team that was paid for when the card was purchased.

Lets ask a more fundemental question. Why are hardware developers funding feature add ins on games ? You can bet your ass they are getting some kind of $$$$ back per title for that feature set to be added.

Nvidia seems to be capitolizing on this whereas ATI is not.

The truth is until we get some sort of unified effects code tools set we are going to continue to see this type of behavior. Its getting old quiet frankly and it benefits only the companys engaging in the behavior.

I just don't understand the mindset aside from some sort of profit scheme beyond hardware sales.

It is however is determental to the consumer.

 

[*kjm]

As long as physX is a one sided technology it belongs in a CONSOLE and not the PC

So true:thumbsup:

 

[Kenmitch]

That's the problem I have with this argument. It's was developed on the console and ported over to the PC, are is almost all games nowadays.

If the PC version looks worse than the console version, then bitch away because Nvidia took away something. But if what Nvidia funded improved graphics in general, and improved it even more if you have an Nvidia card then what are you complaining about?

ATI users at not entitled to "extras" that Nvidia funded. It's not selfish for Nvidia to restrict improvements they funded to their consumers, it's just business. It's not a penalty for the red team if the extra wouldn't have been there in the first place if not for Nvidia funding, it's a bonus for the green team that was paid for when the card was purchased.

You kinda lost me on your statement the more I read it.

So your saying that on the console version of this game that there are no shell casings bouncing around nor expelled from the guns. No fragments are blown out of walls, etc. ???

If the above statement is true then why not vent towards the game developers and not make it a red vs green battle royal

 

[golem]

Lets ask a more fundemental question. Why are hardware developers funding feature add ins on games ? You can bet your ass they are getting some kind of $$$$ back per title for that feature set to be added.

Nvidia seems to be capitolizing on this whereas ATI is not.

The truth is until we get some sort of unified effects code tools set we are going to continue to see this type of behavior. Its getting old quiet frankly and it benefits only the companys engaging in the behavior.

I just don't understand the mindset aside from some sort of profit scheme beyond hardware sales.

It is however is determental to the consumer.

I wouldn't bet my ass on that at all. It's a form of advertising. Why does intel pay computer makers to include intel inside stickers or to have it in their advertising? Because it helps to establish the brand and increases sales overall.

The truth is that almost all games are developed on the console first, with the console being used as the baseline. Some developers spend extra effort to take advantage of the extra capabilities of the PC, most don't.

If the pc would have looked the same w/o nvidia's intervention then no, it's not detrimental to the consumer because s/he gets extras because of Nvidia's dime.

 

[OCGuy]

You can always count on the same thread-crappers in PhysX threads.

Thanks for the link Keys.

Use the report post feature and vent in the comment box, don't vent it here. Or put it in PFI, or moderator discussions, or pm a mod.

Moderator Idontcare

 

[golem]

You kinda lost me on your statement the more I read it.

So your saying that on the console version of this game that there are no shell casings bouncing around nor expelled from the guns. No fragments are blown out of walls, etc. ???

If the above statement is true then why not vent towards the game developers and not make it a red vs green battle royal

That's not what I'm saying at all.

I'm saying that this game was developed on the console first and then ported to PC, the console version should be used as the baseline for what you get in the PC version. It being console first is the important thing.

Say the developer didn't do anything else than just port the game over and all you get is the console game with higher rez and ability to add AA and AF (my assumption).

Nvidia then works with the developer to add pc specific features.

IF this is the case, then how is this bad? The pc version is better than what would have been available if Nvidia hadn't provided extra funding for features (some or maybe even all the extra features might be nvidia only however). The ATI version is no worse than what would have been released if nvidia didn't provide funding.

The only way someone could complain is if because of Nvidia's funding the PC version is somehow worse than what would have been release if Nvidia didn't provide funding for extra features.

I'm just saying this isn't a penalty for ATI from the baseline, but a bonus for Nvidia from the baseline.

 

[Red Storm]

... let us know when ATI is capable of finally delivering Physics on a GPU. I know they were yapping about it 4 years ago. Nothing yet......

While we're at it, let us know when nVidia is capable of finally delivering physics on a GPU. I'm talking about physics, not extra detail that - while nice looking - is entirely aesthetic, is not what the term "physics" brings to mind, and has no actual effect on game play. You know, it's the kind of stuff that had been running (with slightly less detail) on CPUs up until it suddenly became impossible to code for without a 2nd video card.

You think nVidia (or AMD) give a shit about giving us realistic, game play affecting phsyics? Of course they don't, they're just looking for ways to get people to buy more video cards. nVidia's got a bigger marketing budget, so most of this nonsense like vendor lockouts and proprietary tech that seems to run just fine on competing hardware with the slightest of tweaks is coming from their side at the moment. If their positions were reversed I don't think there's any doubt that AMD would try something similar.

People need to see PhysX for what it is (hint: it's not physics). It's a marketing gimmick used to increase sales. It wasn't too long ago we had pretty good looking special effects that seemed to run very well on our CPUs, but then PhysX was announced and now suddenly today's much faster CPUs are not enough to give us what we already had? This is what ticks people off. PhysX enabled visuals do look nice, but do you seriously expect people to believe that the current implementation is that much better than CPUs? Nope, it seems like certain dev companies are strangely taking a step back in CPU coding prowess compared to what we used to have on older hardware, and it doesn't take a genious to see why. It's all about money.

It doesn't matter if the company behind the tech is green, red, or atomic tangerine, they will spin whatever they need to spin to make more money. nVidia fans need to stop acting like PhysX is some sort of glorious breakthrough in visual graphics and acknowledge that it is being intentionally limited on hardware that is more than capable of running it (and I'm referring to CPUs, not just AMD video cards). AMD fans need to also admit that the lack of an alternative from AMD - even a crappy alternative - is definitely going to slow the process of evolving this tech from extra visuals on proprietary solutions to a full on interactive experience that is a part of the game play, and can be run on any capable video card, regardless of brand name.

 

[Keysplayr]

You can always count on the same thread-crappers in PhysX threads.

Thanks for the link Keys.

Ah, they're not hurting anyone really except themselves. Don't worry about them. They are entitled to their opinions as long as not expressed in an inflammatory manner.

 

[Kenmitch]

That's not what I'm saying at all.

I'm saying that this game was developed on the console first and then ported to PC, the console version should be used as the baseline for what you get in the PC version.

Say the developer didn't do anything else than just port the game over and all you get is the console game with higher rez and ability to add AA and AF (my assumption).

Nvidia then works with the developer to add pc specific features.

IF this is the case, then how is this bad? The pc version is better than what would have been available if Nvidia hadn't provided extra funding for features (some or maybe even all the extra features might be nvidia only however). The ATI version is no worse than what would have been released if nvidia didn't provide funding.

The only way someone could complain is if because of Nvidia's funding the PC version is somehow worse than what would have been release if Nvidia didn't provide funding for extra features.

I'm just saying this isn't a penalty for ATI from the baseline, but a bonus for Nvidia from the baseline.

Thanks for clearing that up for me....Sounds logical to me

My beef with the physX thing is when it takes away things that are a giveme in a game. Objects like bullets, wall fragments, things you'd expect to see during normal game play.

It's when giveme things are taken away without physX that becomes the problem.

Just imagine you purchase a new game and install it on your ATI based kick ass gaming machine. Your stuck in a level for hours without a clue as to what to do. Hypothetical problem is one of those things that physX took away from the game when disabled such as healthpacks, ammo, or some other object that was coded for physX only.

I don't have anything against physX as it looks like it could enhance gameplay and the eye candy. It's just the way nvidia uses it as a marketing ploy to only sell it's high end cards!

After all if nvidia wanted it to really take off then they would allow those whom run ATI based systems the ability to purchase a nvidia card as a dedicated physX card without any special tweaks or hacks. I don't see how anybody can argue this point without logic. You pay to play simple as that.

 

[Keysplayr]

Thanks for clearing that up for me....Sounds logical to me

My beef with the physX thing is when it takes away things that are a giveme in a game. Objects like bullets, wall fragments, things you'd expect to see during normal game play.

It's when giveme things are taken away without physX that becomes the problem.

Just imagine you purchase a new game and install it on your ATI based kick ass gaming machine. Your stuck in a level for hours without a clue as to what to do. Hypothetical problem is one of those things that physX took away from the game when disabled such as healthpacks, ammo, or some other object that was coded for physX only.

I don't have anything against physX as it looks like it could enhance gameplay and the eye candy. It's just the way nvidia uses it as a marketing ploy to only sell it's high end cards!

After all if nvidia wanted it to really take off then they would allow those whom run ATI based systems the ability to purchase a nvidia card as a dedicated physX card without any special tweaks or hacks. I don't see how anybody can argue this point without logic. You pay to play simple as that.

This is when you need to reference the console version. If you see anything missing from the console game in comparison to the non PhysX (PhysX OFF) PC version, then you'd have a point. But, if the PhysX off PC version is just like the console version, then what is your beef?
I remember people complaining that things were stripped out of Batman Arkham Asylum when PhysX was off, but in actuality those things were never in the console version and only "added" or "augmented" effects for the PC version. Nothing was stripped.

 

[Madcatatlas]

In essence we have a situation where a proprietary feature, which physx is, is being marketed as something gamechanging.

Newsflash for the more devoted of us:its not. (i realise this could be a hard one to swallow, but honestly, you guys swallowed alot for some 6+ months)

Its just a marketing gimmick and a way for Nvidia to optimize "the way its ment to be played" games to run better on their own hardware, and in some cases even work in some hacks (i do mean this in the most unintrusive form) to make AMD/ATIs solution less favorable.


Honestly i think Nvidia would have "raped" the salecharts if they renamed physx to something else, made it nonprprietary (ie working just as well on AMD cards, something which would require AMD to involve themselves in supporting it) and reintroduced it to the GPU market.


But...i dont think they will, and who in their right mind would cut their framerates in half turning on a feature which makes you see the bullet cartridges on the ground?

Like Grooveriding said, its not worth it by far. And its underlined by much older games doing the same, some would say even better, with CPU optimization.


Good moderating btw, keep up the good work! (sincerely)

 

[golem]

Thanks for clearing that up for me....Sounds logical to me

My beef with the physX thing is when it takes away things that are a giveme in a game. Objects like bullets, wall fragments, things you'd expect to see during normal game play.

It's when giveme things are taken away without physX that becomes the problem.

Just imagine you purchase a new game and install it on your ATI based kick ass gaming machine. Your stuck in a level for hours without a clue as to what to do. Hypothetical problem is one of those things that physX took away from the game when disabled such as healthpacks, ammo, or some other object that was coded for physX only.

I don't have anything against physX as it looks like it could enhance gameplay and the eye candy. It's just the way nvidia uses it as a marketing ploy to only sell it's high end cards!

After all if nvidia wanted it to really take off then they would allow those whom run ATI based systems the ability to purchase a nvidia card as a dedicated physX card without any special tweaks or hacks. I don't see how anybody can argue this point without logic. You pay to play simple as that.

I really think the console version is the key. If it's not in the console version, I don't think most developers will make the effort to add it to the pc version w/o incentive.

But I do agree with lock out of ATI systems to use a dedicated physx card. In the end, a purchaser of a lower end nvidia vid card is still their customer, and shouldn't be prevented from using that card for physx.

 

[SirPauly]

I've read every excuse there is and amazed. It's simply a choice and try to improve upon PC experiences for nVidia's customers. Trying to bring innovation to Physics considering how important this may be and very future forward. Of course there is division and fragmentation and not ideal -- that's a given with proprietary but without it -- there would be wind, promises, words and no choice at all.

It's like the chicken or egg -- how does one create open standards when no one offers the technology first? Through the chaos of proprietary, there is division and fragmentation but also brings innovation and choice, which hopefully creates demand and awareness, where open standards may be forged by the industry as a whole.

Same can be said with Cuda, where this proprietary aspect has helped bring demand and awareness, where open standards were forged by the industry as a whole like OpenCL and Compute Shader.

 

[Keysplayr]

In essence we have a situation where a proprietary feature, which physx is, is being marketed as something gamechanging.

Newsflash for the more devoted of us:its not. (i realise this could be a hard one to swallow, but honestly, you guys swallowed alot for some 6+ months)

Its just a marketing gimmick and a way for Nvidia to optimize "the way its ment to be played" games to run better on their own hardware, and in some cases even work in some hacks (i do mean this in the most unintrusive form) to make AMD/ATIs solution less favorable.


Honestly i think Nvidia would have "raped" the salecharts if they renamed physx to something else, made it nonprprietary (ie working just as well on AMD cards, something which would require AMD to involve themselves in supporting it) and reintroduced it to the GPU market.


But...i dont think they will, and who in their right mind would cut their framerates in half turning on a feature which makes you see the bullet cartridges on the ground?

Like Grooveriding said, its not worth it by far. And its underlined by much older games doing the same, some would say even better, with CPU optimization.


Good moderating btw, keep up the good work! (sincerely)

What are the only pieces of hardware than PhsyX will not run on, and what do all these have in common? I'm not talking sound cards or SATA controllers here. All CPU's can run PhysX. Which means any PC can run PhysX. The only pieces of hardware that cannot run PhysX, are AMD based GPU's. This, does not make PhysX proprietary. It makes AMD the only one who won't run it. I didn't say "can't", mind you, but won't.

 

[Compddd]

I hope Nvidia goes out of business so that keys goes insane

Personal attacks are not acceptable.

Moderator Idontcare

 

[Daedalus685]

While we're at it, let us know when nVidia is capable of finally delivering physics on a GPU. I'm talking about physics, not extra detail that - while nice looking - is entirely aesthetic, is not what the term "physics" brings to mind, and has no actual effect on game play.

You mean like lighting effects?


This has always bothered me as an optical physicist.... why is boring old kinematics and dynamics referred to as gaming "physics" where as all of the wonderful lighting effects and what not, which require much more advanced understanding of physics to model (though perhaps not as advanced of a computer to compute) are never mentioned at all?

It is nearly as general as calling it in game science..

 

[Keysplayr]

I hope Nvidia goes out of business so that keys goes insane

Jeez, you're making me think you don't like me or something.