PhysX games galore!

[Carfax83]

As a result of NVidia and Ubisoft's gaming alliance, PhysX will be in quite a number of big AAA releases in the near future.

Watch Dogs is supposed to get the PhysX treatment post release like AC IV, and I hope they bring back the cool physics effects seen in the E3 2012 demo.. Far Cry 4, AC Unity, The Crew and Tom Clancy's The Division should all be getting PhysX effects integrated into the games..

This is in addition to Batman Arkham Knight (which should also have PhysX based on precedent) and the Witcher 3 which is confirmed to use PhysX.. Oh, and let's not forget Star Citizen.

So much for the death of PhysX eh? :biggrin:

No seriously. Why doesn't Ubisoft just drop Havok and go with PhysX entirely (like CDPR) for their low level physics? After Watch Dogs, Havok to me is lackluster. PhysX is just a much better and more capable physics engine it seems, as you have the option to use the GPU for advanced physics effects that would cripple a CPU.

NVidia, more than any other company is advancing game physics by introducing technology such as Flex, which makes Havok look long in the tooth.

Even the driving mechanics in Mafia 2, a game that came out in 2010 is better than Watch Dogs. And then you have PhysX powered games like Project CARS which are even more advanced; although that's not really a fair comparison to be honest as Project CARS is a game that focuses solely on driving.

But the point is, PhysX can offer so much more than Havok at this stage. Ubisoft should just drop Havok entirely and go with PhysX completely. I'm sure it would even be cheaper for them, as NVidia doesn't charge much to license the technology.

 

[Attic]

Wish I could get excited about this. Too bad it's Ubisoft+nVidia which whom get together and deliver well below expectations in their collaborations.

Hype they are great at, i'll give it that.

 

[f1sherman]

Whats the state of so called "hybrid PhysX" these days? Mixing main Radeon card with dedicated NV physX card.

I gather it's mostly working, right?

 

[brandonb]

Is this a NVDA press release?

Havok to me is lackluster.

Are you a software developer? Havok has a lot going for it actually. Havok AI for one.

I'd actually use ODE over PhysX.

 

[Carfax83]

Wish I could get excited about this. Too bad it's Ubisoft+nVidia which whom get together and deliver well below expectations in their collaborations.

Hype they are great at, i'll give it that.

Indeed. AC IV's PhysX implementation was terrible at the beginning with massive performance issues. But eventually they did patch those problems out and now I can run the PhysX on high settings on my dedicated PhysX card with no performance issues.

That said, AC IV doesn't really make effective use of PhysX. The interactive smoke particles look great and all that, but that's just too limited.

Watch Dogs has much greater potential for PhysX, so I hope they capitalize on it..

 

[wand3r3r]

Is this a NVDA press release?

Are you a software developer? Havok has a lot going for it actually. Havok AI for one.

I'd actually use ODE over PhysX.

Reads like one.

If I were NVidia's CEO, I wouldn't support Mantle. I would play to my strengths, ...

 

[f1sherman]

12 minutes left

http://www.twitch.tv/gogcom

 

[Carfax83]

Are you a software developer? Havok has a lot going for it actually. Havok AI for one.

No I'm not a developer, I'm a gamer that's interested in the advancement of game physics. And while A.I great, this thread is about physics dude

I'd actually use ODE over PhysX.

Never heard of ODE.. But after a quick google search, it seems they are an open source physics library.

Typically, open source physics engines/libraries don't really see much commercial use it seems, likely due to less support and features.

Bulletphysics has been around for a while now, but how many games use it? In fact, how many games use ODE?

PhysX and Havok have the lions share of the game physics market, but PhysX is looking like it's going to surpass Havok as it's integrated in Unreal Engine 4, and Unity 5 and has greater functionality.. Havok is integrated in the Frostbite 3 engine..

 

[Carfax83]

Whats the state of so called "hybrid PhysX" these days? Mixing main Radeon card with dedicated NV physX card.

I gather it's mostly working, right?

I have no idea. But I do know that NVidia has plans to port PhysX to DirectCompute, so Radeon owners should get some PhysX loving in the future..

12 minutes left]

http://www.twitch.tv/gogcom

Going to watch this for sure..

 

[Noctifer616]

Typically, open source physics engines/libraries don't really see much commercial use it seems, likely due to less support and features.

Bulletphysics has been around for a while now, but how many games use it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_(software)

Not that many games, but GTA 5 uses Bullet.

 

[NTMBK]

Ugh, PhysX.

 

[Jodell88]

Until PhysX isn't tied to Nvidia hardware, I'm not a fan.

 

[Gloomy]

Ugh, PhysX.

Seems like a very capable physics engine to me. A lot of games use PhysX instead of Havok.

Unless you mean the sparkly effects version of Physx, aka GPU-accelerated effects Physx, which is garbage that more often than not detracts from a game

 

[Carfax83]

Ugh, PhysX.

Have you seen the Witcher 3 trailer?

Powered by PhysX

Dat water! Dem clouds! Dat hair! :awe:

 

[96Firebird]

Until PhysX isn't tied to Nvidia hardware, I'm not a fan.

Congratulations on becoming a fan!

 

[tg2708]

I hope i will be able to wear that boss-like skeleton armor. On a side not physx on certain games needs to be optimized more, borderlands 2 for example is horrible with it.

 

[Erenhardt]

Physx looks funny compared to this: http://nextcargame.com/
runs fine on any hardware

 

[thilanliyan]

Have you seen the Witcher 3 trailer?

Powered by PhysX

Dat water! Dem clouds! Dat hair! :awe:

Is it actually going to have GPU-accelerated PhysX or the regular CPU-PhysX.

 

[Carfax83]

Is it actually going to have GPU-accelerated PhysX or the regular CPU-PhysX.

It will have both. PhysX isn't really separated by CPU and GPU anymore. Instead PhysX games operate on a scaling level. All of the low level physics should be run on the CPU, plus some of the higher level ones like hair, cloth etcetera.

With GPU accelerated PhysX though, you can basically have not only more effects at the same time, but higher quality ones as well.

For example, the hair physics on Geralt and other major characters like Triss Merigold will very likely be processed by the CPU. But, if you enable hardware PhysX on high settings, suddenly hair and fur PhysX become available to even the minor NPCs; and with greater realism...

That was just a hypothetical example based on what I've seen in previous PhysX games so I'm not saying the actual game is going to be that way..

 

[Gloomy]

Hairworks isn't Physx, and it is possible to run it on AMD cards as it is just directcompute like TressFX. Unless Nvidia decides to vendor lock it ofcourse.

 

[Carfax83]

Hairworks isn't Physx, and it is possible to run it on AMD cards as it is just directcompute like TressFX. Unless Nvidia decides to vendor lock it ofcourse.

Yes, Hairworks isn't bound by PhysX. It requires an underlying physics solver to run, whether it's PhysX, DirectCompute, Havok etcetera...

Personally, I hope that the hair physics in Witcher 3 uses CUDA for NVidia platforms, and DirectCompute for AMD.. The hair and fur physics should run faster under CUDA than DirectCompute..

 

[Techhog]

As a result of NVidia and Ubisoft's gaming alliance, PhysX will be in quite a number of big AAA releases in the near future.

Watch Dogs is supposed to get the PhysX treatment post release like AC IV, and I hope they bring back the cool physics effects seen in the E3 2012 demo.. Far Cry 4, AC Unity, The Crew and Tom Clancy's The Division should all be getting PhysX effects integrated into the games..

This is in addition to Batman Arkham Knight (which should also have PhysX based on precedent) and the Witcher 3 which is confirmed to use PhysX.. Oh, and let's not forget Star Citizen.

So much for the death of PhysX eh? :biggrin:

No seriously. Why doesn't Ubisoft just drop Havok and go with PhysX entirely (like CDPR) for their low level physics? After Watch Dogs, Havok to me is lackluster. PhysX is just a much better and more capable physics engine it seems, as you have the option to use the GPU for advanced physics effects that would cripple a CPU.

NVidia, more than any other company is advancing game physics by introducing technology such as Flex, which makes Havok look long in the tooth.

Even the driving mechanics in Mafia 2, a game that came out in 2010 is better than Watch Dogs. And then you have PhysX powered games like Project CARS which are even more advanced; although that's not really a fair comparison to be honest as Project CARS is a game that focuses solely on driving.

But the point is, PhysX can offer so much more than Havok at this stage. Ubisoft should just drop Havok entirely and go with PhysX completely. I'm sure it would even be cheaper for them, as NVidia doesn't charge much to license the technology.

Because completely saying "**** you AMD" while mainly developing on AMD-based consoles doesn't really make sense?

Congratulations on becoming a fan!

You know what he means. Until PhysX can be used on a system with a primary AMD GPU without hacks, it's Nvidia-only. Can it run on a CPU? Yes. But can it run on a CPU without drops to single-digit frame rates? No way. Saying that you can use PhysX without only having Nvidia graphics is like saying that you can play Watch Dogs on a Trinity APU.

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Whats the recommended minimum to run a dedicated physx card these days? I have a 770 4GB as my main card, would a 650 vanilla 1GB be ok for physx?

 

[blastingcap]

If NV GPUs were in consoles then maybe GPU-accelerated PHYSX would have more interest.

NV GPUs are not in consoles, and GPU-accelerated PHSYX will continue to have weak support since most popular PC games are multi-platform (read: console ports), and those porters aren't likely to spend much time/effort/money adding GPU-accelerated PHYSX after the fact onto an already completed game. Unless of course NV provides resources/$$$. And even if you do tack that on, PHYSX is not game-changing, like literally game-changing. The closest they've come so far, AFAIK, is making PHYSX debris be able to hurt you in Mafia II. Up till that point, PHYSX was strictly for looks and had no bearing at all in terms of game dynamics.

 

[Carfax83]

Whats the recommended minimum to run a dedicated physx card these days? I have a 770 4GB as my main card, would a 650 vanilla 1GB be ok for physx?

Yeah, a GTX 650 vanilla would be good. But I'd personally recommend a 650 Ti instead..

The Ti isn't much more, and has twice the CUDA cores. CUDA cores and clock speed are the most important factors for PhysX performance in a dedicated card.