You mean it wasn't from the majority of the few GPU PhysX accelerated titles that pretty much makes that statement and opinion true?
Not so fast...
Part of that statement is true.
Let's take it line-by-line:
It should be noted that title support for GPU accelerated physics simulation is NOT the end game.
Fair enough, not the end game... but it is a start nonetheless.
The end game is having GPU physics as an integral part of game play and not just eye candy.
Yes, but I suppose nVidia, the PhysX team and every game developer feels pretty much the same way. Bit of a non-statement.
If it is optional eye candy, GPU physics will not gain traction.
This is debatable.
On the one hand we have plenty of examples of games that were successful while riding mainly on their 'eye candy' hype.
On the other hand, we have plenty of examples of games that were successful simply because they had good gameplay... they were basically just good games.
If GPU physics is included in such a game, it will piggy-back on its success and gain traction that way.
Heck, the entire OpenGL API pretty much just piggy-backed on the success of GLQuake, and other major games which adopted the engine (eg Half-Life). It helped push Glide from the number 1 spot of 3D APIs.
The titles we have seen today with shattering glass and cloth waving in the wind is not integral to game play and the impact on the game's experience is minimal.
Yes, but see above... that is not necessarily a bad thing. More eye-candy is pretty much what the entire GPU market revolves around anyway. It's a bit hypocritical. I mean, if you compare the early Voodoo accelerators to today's DX11 cards, they're a truckload of features on the new cards, but hardly any of them have much of an effect on gameplay and experience... They just give you more eyecandy (realtime shadows, HDR effects, sharper texturing, antialiasing etc).
Since pretty much all games make use of these features, and nothing looks like early GLQuake or such anymore, I would say that eyecandy is generally a good thing, and AMD made a lot of money selling it.
We are looking for ways to integrate GPU physics better into game play. Or even things like AI instead of focusing on eye candy / effects physic.
Okay, you said that more than 2 years ago... Where is it?
Seems like you haven't even made a start yet, let alone that you are anywhere near your proposed 'end game'.