• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel buying Havok

“Originally Posted by Gerard
Refer to the link posted above.”
I did and it proves my point. 150 games total, 13 more due out this year. Havok are tiny making up a very small amount of the market.

Until Havok find there way into a major game engine that licensed out to lots of companies like the Quake/Doom or UT engines or one of the others Havok will not get a large market share. The UT 3 engine has already be licensed for use in 123 games and the list is growing. ID next engine I am sure will also be used in tons of games along with the other major engines that are used a lot.






“Originally Posted by Jihad
I see Phsyx is getting loads of top games! Oh wait.”
Wiki is never a good source by its self. There are tons of great Ageia powered games missing from that list from Medal Of Honor: Airborne, Rise Of Nations to Gothic 3 and Dragon Age among many others. Not that I wanted to turn this into Ageia V Havok. I was just pointing out Havok are not as big as people think, few games use them. Both Ageia and Havok together are small and Havok are smaller then Ageia. Most games use other physic engines.
 
Last edited:
The medium term future of CPUs will see increasing numbers of cores available, with games struggling to use all available core efficiently. Intel is pushing hard for utilising these excess CPUs for physics.

By buying Havoc, they are buying a well recignised standard for physics implementation. By doing this they can instantly insert themselves into the market. Maybe specialised instructions will be added in the future, but for the time being intel can continue to optimise the havoc engine to work will with multi-core intel CPUs (physics-type calculations being relatively easy to parallelise).
 
Pottsey said:
Until Havok find there way into a major game engine that licensed out to lots of companies like the Quake/Doom or UT engines or one of the others Havok will not get a large market share. The UT 3 engine has already be licensed for use in 123 games and the list is growing. ID next engine I am sure will also be used in tons of games along with the other major engines that are used a lot.
Click to expand...

*Cough* Source engine *cough* :)
 
“Originally Posted by oweneades
*Cough* Source engine *cough*”
Now correct me if I am wrong but the source engine didn’t do very well few developers licensed and used it. I for one cannot think of any none Valve games that use it.

I never really understood why the engine did so bad as the engine it self seems really good, stable, fast and scaled well from old to new hardware. Perhaps Valve where asking to much for a licence but either way as a game engine Source failed as almost no developers licence and used it. Shame if you ask me.
 
Pottsey said:
“Originally Posted by oweneades
*Cough* Source engine *cough*”
Now correct me if I am wrong but the source engine didn’t do very well few developers licensed and used it. I for one cannot think of any none Valve games that use it.

I never really understood why the engine did so bad as the engine it self seems really good, stable, fast and scaled well from old to new hardware. Perhaps Valve where asking to much for a licence but either way as a game engine Source failed as almost no developers licence and used it. Shame if you ask me.
Click to expand...


seriously pottsey quote button :)

I agree with your second point. I also don't understand why the engine wasn't used in other games however I can only assume money had something to play with the decisions.

Like you said the engine itself is excellent and scales extremely well whilst still looking pretty good.
 
Pottsey said:
“Originally Posted by oweneades
*Cough* Source engine *cough*”
Now correct me if I am wrong but the source engine didn’t do very well few developers licensed and used it. I for one cannot think of any none Valve games that use it.
Click to expand...

Vampire: The Masquerade
The Ship
Dark Messiah of Might and Magic (fantastic game)
SiN Episodes
Postal 3 is upcoming too as is The Crossing
 
Cuchulain That’s 5 games some of which are not out and we are talking about a 3+ year old engine. I stand by what I said, Source failed as a game engine as almost no one used it.
 
i suppose being intergrated into a game engine is a much bigger deal and far harder than getting into individual title's.
but physics being handled by cpu's can only be a good thing for the consumer and should see far better games being released lets just hope it doesnt herald a price rise on cpu hardware :\
 
Well, personally I think Havok has a better line up of titles, but then Aegia do have thier claws into the UT3 engine which is going to be huge in itself.

It's going to be an interesting competition, but I think Intel have probably weighed up the options and support will be something they've considered. Maybe we'll see a Havok/Intel PPU or like mentioned, some kind of CPU extension(s). I don't really see how this is a bad thing for us gamers anyways! :D

Edit: And on a slightly different note, how can you call the Source engine a failure?! Half Life 2 is huge and with games such as Portal and TF2 being released, thier making a fortune from the Source Engine! Also consider the fact they can continually update it (which they are for Episode 2, and see the different style of TF2?!) look at how quickly HDR was included into the engine. (Though in some form of software rendering, I don't know the exact details)

Edit 2: I should learn to read posts better /oops. Sorry Pottsey!
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
“Originally Posted by Gerard
As opposed to about 30 games total for ageia physx.”
Actually it’s in the 100’s there have been more Ageia games out this year then Havok. But that’s not the point I would guess both Ageia and Havok together make up less then 11% of the market.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's probably true, Bejeweled and Tetris and stuff doesn't use physics .... but that's not really what we're talking about here is it?
Both Ageia and Havok are dealing with the games that actually matter, and the games that we care about in here, of course there are major titles with their own physics systems, but Ageia & Havok has it covered.
And Ageia is a good thing, they have a brilliant physics system, and more and more games behind them to prove it. Doesn't change my thoughts that the PPU is absolute garbage, but their physics system really does work, and that's what's keeping them from going bankrupt.
 
Gamezy said:
Well, personally I think Havok has a better line up of titles, but then Aegia do have thier claws into the UT3 engine which is going to be huge in itself.
Click to expand...

Nah they ain't got UT3 Engine exclusivity or anything, a few games on Unreal 3 don't use Ageia. :)

But yeah for UT3 a PPU may come in handy, not getting one for myself probably nothing great to be added, UT3 is just a deathmatch game to me.
 
atm nyou can do a lot more with physx than with havok, if games keep using havok over ageia physx, then special effects and environmental destruction wont be that big, e.g. the tornado in UT3 sucking anything in that goes near it, cloth tearing, cant do them with havok
 
Pottsey said:
Cuchulain That’s 5 games some of which are not out and we are talking about a 3+ year old engine. I stand by what I said, Source failed as a game engine as almost no one used it.
Click to expand...

also how many games used the Doom 3 engine? Prey? err?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom