• 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.

CPR W3 on Hairworks(Nvidia Game Works)-'the code of this feature cannot be optimized for AMD'

Gregster said:
How is it wrong? TressFX requires a hack to get running on Lichdom and a nVidia GPU as the developers have blocked nVidia users from using this AMD developed tech. Not AMD's fault of course and the developers took it upon themselves to block this feature on nVidia cards.



So you need to hack the game to get it to work on nVidia...Gotcha and thanks for the heads up. I do believe GameWorks just works on AMD and doesn't need any game hacking to get running and is not blocked in anyway, shape or form.
Click to expand...

Don't want to sound like a dick mate but opening up a file in notepad and changing a 0 to a 1 isn't hacking lol. More a quick edit.

But your right that you are required to go and manually go enable it your self. IMO should be right there in the menus for nVidia users to choose to enable or disable at will.

I just wish Devs would pull up their pants and stop taking it up their backsides from AMD and nVidia and start doing things properly. Its their game they should have the say not AMD nor nVidia. Doubt game devs will loose out that much if they don't get certain tech such as Tress FX or game works. Yea they can add that little bit more to the game but it doesn't make games. Optimise as much as they can for both vendors and leave the rest of the optimisation to AMD and nVidia.
 
r7slayer said:
Don't want to sound like a dick mate but opening up a file in notepad and changing a 0 to a 1 isn't hacking lol. More a quick edit.

But your right that you are required to go and manually go enable it your self. IMO should be right there in the menus for nVidia users to choose to enable or disable at will.

I just wish Devs would pull up their pants and stop taking it up their backsides from AMD and nVidia and start doing things properly. Its their game they should have the say not AMD nor nVidia. Doubt game devs will loose out that much if they don't get certain tech such as Tress FX or game works. Yea they can add that little bit more to the game but it doesn't make games. Optimise as much as they can for both vendors and leave the rest of the optimisation to AMD and nVidia.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of that, AMD themselves are also not whiter than white, why can't Nvidia run TressFX in Linch-Doom? thats what i would like to know, AMD? humm?

But a wider argument for me is why is it that Game developers are so dependant on hardware vendor plug-in and play API's.

As i said before, fire up Blender or Maya (Other CAD/3D software is available) and do it yourselves you lazy #####!
 
kGdoiGk.gif
 
People by and large overestimate developers, whilst some of the major ones will have teams of highly experienced coders, many of them are probably just about competent with DirectX and will be happy to receive any specialised help on offer, particularly when it comes at no cost to them.

Even the most talented of developers aren't going to know as much as AMD and NVidia's dedicated software engineers do when it comes to maximising performance on their GPU's, so when NVidia actively send their engineers out to assist them and AMD don't it shouldn't come as a surprise when AMD cards ultimately run comparatively poorly. Most developers also likely struggle or don't have time to do some graphical effects which is why so many of them embrace GameWorks middleware (or perhaps it just saves them money to buy it ready-made).

There also seems to be a lot of ignorance about the time and costs involved in developing a game, even if they have the talent it's not the utopia people are imagining where they have all of the time in the world to get games running perfectly on every piece of hardware, they have bills coming in every week, wages to pay, pressure from banks (loans) or publishers. All they want to do is get the game out in an bug free/enjoyable/playable state in the shortest time possible, there are a few who can afford to take their time but they are by and large the exception.

Look no further than fixed hardware consoles to see how wildly developer talent varies, they're all working from the same development kits.
 
Last edited:
I don't think hair is really the pressing issue some people seem to think.

When games get closer to reality THEN developers will worry about helmet hair enough to allocate cycles, which should hopefully be in abundance by then.
 
humbug said:
Agree with all of that, AMD themselves are also not whiter than white, why can't Nvidia run TressFX in Linch-Doom? thats what i would like to know, AMD? humm?

But a wider argument for me is why is it that Game developers are so dependant on hardware vendor plug-in and play API's.

As i said before, fire up Blender or Maya (Other CAD/3D software is available) and do it yourselves you lazy #####!
Click to expand...

Isn't think like complaining that a developer uses DirectX/Mantle/Vulkan instead of writing it themselves?

There's also the concept of code re-use and not re-inventing the wheel. I doubt every developer wants to spend the time to create their own. I understand Roff has done a fair amount of coding in his time and I bet he's used a 3rd party library from time to time instead of writing everything from scratch.

And isn't it a good thing that people do write them? Else we might not get these things at all.
And if more people write them then hopefully they'll get better.

We already had DirectX but AMD wrote Mantle to try to improve on it. While Mantle itself hasn't become the defacto API (and seems like it won't with thecurrent version) it has in turn spawned more APIs that might.

So if someone writes something better than GameWorks (and markets it to developers, rather than assuming the developers will do all the leg-work) then maybe that will catch on until something better comes along.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Isn't think like complaining that a developer uses DirectX/Mantle/Vulkan instead of writing it themselves?

There's also the concept of code re-use and not re-inventing the wheel. I doubt every developer wants to spend the time to create their own. I understand Roff has done a fair amount of coding in his time and I bet he's used a 3rd party library from time to time instead of writing everything from scratch.

And isn't it a good thing that people do write them? Else we might not get these things at all.
And if more people write them then hopefully they'll get better.

We already had DirectX but AMD wrote Mantle to try to improve on it. While Mantle itself hasn't become the defacto API (and seems like it won't with thecurrent version) it has in turn spawned more APIs that might.

So if someone writes something better than GameWorks (and markets it to developers, rather than assuming the developers will do all the leg-work) then maybe that will catch on until something better comes along.
Click to expand...

Writing an API such as Mantle is a million miles away from manipulating geometry objects, i have no chance of writing an API like Mantle or DX in my lifetime even if i had the skills for it, which i don't.

But i can replicate Nvidia's recognised PhysX effects without using anything from Nvidia, not even one of their GPU's, something almost everyone thinks is impossible because its all invented by Nvidia and only they have the tools and equipment.... nothing can be further from the truth, what's more none of it is Rocket Science, i'm certainly not one.
 
Tonester0011 said:
I've seen one of your videos. You really can't.
If you think you can, you've got something missing upstairs.
Click to expand...

And you're the one trying to educate me on sofa experts? i'm not an expert, not by a long way but i wouldn't miss your educating me on anything i did for, well, anything. Go... :p
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Writing an API such as Mantle is a million miles away from manipulating geometry objects, i have no chance of writing an API like Mantle or DX in my lifetime even if i had the skills for it, which i don't.

But i can replicate Nvidia's recognised PhysX effects without using anything from Nvidia, not even one of their GPU's, something almost everyone thinks is impossible because its all invented by Nvidia and only they have the tools and equipment.... nothing can be further from the truth, what's more none of it is Rocket Science, i'm certainly not one.
Click to expand...

Yes, but these are games companies with budgets and experts (no offence) so while it's a lot to expect you to create and API the same rules may not apply to them.

I'd also be interested to know which games this library you've created is used in?
 
Orangey said:
I don't think hair is really the pressing issue some people seem to think.

When games get closer to reality THEN developers will worry about helmet hair enough to allocate cycles, which should hopefully be in abundance by then.
Click to expand...

Have to agree, currently i think its a pointless effect and for some reason amd and nvidia have had it as a feature of card tech demo's many years in the past and its still pretty "meh" at best. Can't remember the last time i played a game and found myself thinking a characters hair was some kind of focal point.

As said when games get closer to reality then it'll be more noticeable but currently its just something thats not that much of an issue to the vast majority playing games.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Yes, but these are games companies with budgets and experts (no offence) so while it's a lot to expect you to create and API the same rules may not apply to them.

I'd also be interested to know which games this library you've created is used in?
Click to expand...

None taken :)

The API is Bullet, the libraries are a mixture of my own and some already in Cryengine (which has a Bullet backend) tho the PhysX are more often than not modifications i made to those existing Cryengine libraries.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Isn't bullet just a physx engine like whatever it's being called in GameWorks?
Isn't that what you said you weren't using? That you had written your own?
Click to expand...

Yes it is and no thats not what i said, Bullet is not tied to any one vendor, it does not care if its AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Qualcomm or ARM.

You need one or another Physics engine to make Physics effects, the difference is you can make the effects you are already familiar with or whatever your imagination can muster from scratch.

The thing with a thing like Game Works is its a set of prefabricated libraries, its pretty much just "chose one and paste"

Its a bit like buying a picnic hamper, open it, chose, stuff yer face.

Its cheap and easy, which of course is a benefit to the developer, its also a benefit to the Vendor (Nvidia / AMD) who created these libraries because it ends up as something thats visually recognised as brand specific, it in its self becomes an advert.

The down side is it kinda dumbs down developers who have little incentive to be creative, invent something new. be original.

But more to the point these libraries can then be used as a tool to undermine your competition in ways that are now being argued is happening.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom