-
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.
First Look: Unreal Tournament 3 With PhysX
- Thread starter Pottsey
- Start date
I simply do not get it, from what i can see the Crytek engine can simulate wind type environments very well, so can the ppu, but who's their to tell the minor detail difference, i could honestly say as long as it looks good i will play it, and gameplay roots its way into that sentence while being on topic 
“from what i can see the Crytek engine can simulate wind type environments very well,”
Various people keep saying this but no one has shown any wind effects yet. Where are the tree and leaves blowing, rubbish on ground being blown. Explosions causing wind e.c.t
If you have seen this you must have a video link. Please show me ingame videos of wind done by Crytek engine or any other none PPU game. I dont know how someone could say minor detail difference in wind between Crytek and PPU games. Just look at the wind in GRAW 2 its far better then Crytek. Not just a minor difference.
Various people keep saying this but no one has shown any wind effects yet. Where are the tree and leaves blowing, rubbish on ground being blown. Explosions causing wind e.c.t
If you have seen this you must have a video link. Please show me ingame videos of wind done by Crytek engine or any other none PPU game. I dont know how someone could say minor detail difference in wind between Crytek and PPU games. Just look at the wind in GRAW 2 its far better then Crytek. Not just a minor difference.
Last edited:
Thats surely not meant to be that impressive? The wall shooting stuff looked naff, shoot at a wall and a block at a time smashes
Red Faction was doing this years ago, and as for shooting the towers near the beginning too, about 6 rockets? :/
I really wanted PhysX to take off, it had so much potential
Red Faction was doing this years ago, and as for shooting the towers near the beginning too, about 6 rockets? :/
I really wanted PhysX to take off, it had so much potential
sam83uk said:
These physics games could never be played online. Unless the physic objects that break apart have no effect on gameplay. i.e. they can be run straight through and dont stop bullets etc. Otherwise there's just far too much information being passed back and forth.
“Alan Wakehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Detn...related&search=
If Alan Wake is the best you can get out of CPU physics its proof CPU’s are to weak at physics and we need better solutions like PPU’s or GPU’s doing physics.
Alan Wake doesn’t count for lots of reasons.
First its not a real games that’s out. It is a tech demo of a game they are working on. As I said before what you get in tech demos are not what you get in real games. As you can do things in tech demos, that are to demanding for real games.
But that’s not the main reason it does not count, the main reason being there is no wind. Everything’s still. Look away from the tornado nothing moves. Meters away from the tornado and nothing. No movement. Only the things in the centre of the tornado move. Surly a tornado of that size should be causeing wind blowing everything about. Sucking tiles off roofs. Windows blown out, They cheat. No wind, only things directly under the tornado tunnel are sucked into it.
Not only that but it’s a tech demo of a game that’s not out for years which is ran on today’s hardware would get single digit FPS. They used a overclocked hand selected Intel CPU that was the best of the best at the time. Far better then anything in shops and its still worse then a PPU.
I really don’t see how that counts as wind considering there is no wind. The grass is even still and there’s a large tornado moving about.
If Alan Wake is the best you can get out of CPU physics its proof CPU’s are to weak at physics and we need better solutions like PPU’s or GPU’s doing physics.
Alan Wake doesn’t count for lots of reasons.
First its not a real games that’s out. It is a tech demo of a game they are working on. As I said before what you get in tech demos are not what you get in real games. As you can do things in tech demos, that are to demanding for real games.
But that’s not the main reason it does not count, the main reason being there is no wind. Everything’s still. Look away from the tornado nothing moves. Meters away from the tornado and nothing. No movement. Only the things in the centre of the tornado move. Surly a tornado of that size should be causeing wind blowing everything about. Sucking tiles off roofs. Windows blown out, They cheat. No wind, only things directly under the tornado tunnel are sucked into it.
Not only that but it’s a tech demo of a game that’s not out for years which is ran on today’s hardware would get single digit FPS. They used a overclocked hand selected Intel CPU that was the best of the best at the time. Far better then anything in shops and its still worse then a PPU.
I really don’t see how that counts as wind considering there is no wind. The grass is even still and there’s a large tornado moving about.
Last edited:
No offense Pottsey but at this stage you're edging towards the fanboi position a bit too strongly. It seems that you're just trying to justify the £100 you spent on your PPU.
Sure it would be good if all games support it but they don't. Very few games do. It's just not worth it unless you play a good few of those games.
To me while there wasn't background wind the tornado looked a lot more realisitic and the objects interracted a lot more realistically then in the PPU video you posted.
As far as the computer they used it certainly didn't seem to be running in single digits. Sure they used a quad core cpu and a 8800GTX (probably) but when the game is released that hardware will be standard. I'd consider my rig to be an average enthusiasts rig, nothing major but I'd still feel confident that I could run that game maxed out without any issues.
Sure it would be good if all games support it but they don't. Very few games do. It's just not worth it unless you play a good few of those games.
To me while there wasn't background wind the tornado looked a lot more realisitic and the objects interracted a lot more realistically then in the PPU video you posted.
As far as the computer they used it certainly didn't seem to be running in single digits. Sure they used a quad core cpu and a 8800GTX (probably) but when the game is released that hardware will be standard. I'd consider my rig to be an average enthusiasts rig, nothing major but I'd still feel confident that I could run that game maxed out without any issues.
“here the roof tiles are used as a shield then drop bouncing of the objects, isnt this what the PPU does?”
Yes a PPU does that but that’s pretty basic a CPU should be able to do that easy. The only difference is with a PPU you would get more FPS by doing that on a PPU over a CPU. But it should be fast on a CPU as its pretty simple as physics go.
“As far as the computer they used it certainly didn't seem to be running in single digits. Sure they used a quad core cpu and a 8800GTX (probably) but when the game is released that hardware will be standard.”
That tech demo on today’s home PC’s would run in single digits.
That’s part of my point.
I asked for an example of CPU’s doing wind now and all that’s been shown is something that’s not due out for 2+ years if it’s not delayed and doesn’t run on today’s standard hardware. Yet you tell me I am edging towards the fanboi position.
It’s not just a standard quad core CPU either. They hand picked the best quad core CPU Intel had, overclocked to the max it could go more then 1ghz over standard speed. Far beyond anything we have now.
How can that be a fair example of how CPU’s can do all the effects a PPU can? The way I see it the CPU is far beyond home CPU’s and physic wise its doing worse then the PPU as the wind is not working.
As for a 8800GTX I don’t believe so. Going by the rest of the system hardware and how much it was all overclocked by I would expect dual 8800 Ultra possibly overclocked as well. When dealing with systems like that they use top of the range hand picked hardware. Not standard shop hardware.
Sorry but the only fan boys are the CPU fans who refuse to admit how bad he CPU is at physics and how a PPU does better physics now today. I don’t see a 1ghz overclocked quad core CPU doing worse then a PPU that’s out now as a win for CPU’s being better at physics.
CPU’s are holding physics back big time. If everyone had PPU’s physics would be way better then what we have now.
EDIT: Unconfirmed but it looks like 7900GTX's where used in the Alan wake demo.
Another thing I should mention is the Alan wake tornado and map was vary sparse compared to UT3. The PPU tornado was a full working map with lots of buildings and people running about firing weapons like a real game. There was far more physics work going on in the UT map then Alan Wake map which was more of a emepty area.
With all the extra objects and players on the screen there must be tons more physics data being processed on the UT3 map compared to the Alan wake map.:EDIT end
“To me while there wasn't background wind the tornado looked a lot more realisitic and the objects interracted a lot more realistically then in the PPU video you posted.”
I really cannot agree. How can the CPU tornado which doesn’t have wind, doesn’t effect surrounding objects be the one that interacts a lot more realistically then the PPU tornado which does have wind, does effect surrounding objects.
Surly the tornado with wind that affects surrounding objects is the one that’s a lot more realistic. At least with the PPU grass and trees are blown by wind while with the CPU the tree just sits there like there’s no tornado.
Forget about the graphical look of the tornado as that’s down to the artists and GPU not the CPU or PPU. The tornado in UT3 has to fit the artist style of the rest of the game.
“It seems that you're just trying to justify the £100 you spent on your PPU.”
It’s got nothing to do with justifying the money spent. It to do with the technology. I try my best to prove my points with facts and people come up with rubbish like but Crisis does all the effects with a CPU the PPU does. Even though I can name a bunch of physics demanding effects Crysis doesn’t do.
Yes a PPU does that but that’s pretty basic a CPU should be able to do that easy. The only difference is with a PPU you would get more FPS by doing that on a PPU over a CPU. But it should be fast on a CPU as its pretty simple as physics go.
“As far as the computer they used it certainly didn't seem to be running in single digits. Sure they used a quad core cpu and a 8800GTX (probably) but when the game is released that hardware will be standard.”
That tech demo on today’s home PC’s would run in single digits.
That’s part of my point.
I asked for an example of CPU’s doing wind now and all that’s been shown is something that’s not due out for 2+ years if it’s not delayed and doesn’t run on today’s standard hardware. Yet you tell me I am edging towards the fanboi position.
It’s not just a standard quad core CPU either. They hand picked the best quad core CPU Intel had, overclocked to the max it could go more then 1ghz over standard speed. Far beyond anything we have now.
How can that be a fair example of how CPU’s can do all the effects a PPU can? The way I see it the CPU is far beyond home CPU’s and physic wise its doing worse then the PPU as the wind is not working.
As for a 8800GTX I don’t believe so. Going by the rest of the system hardware and how much it was all overclocked by I would expect dual 8800 Ultra possibly overclocked as well. When dealing with systems like that they use top of the range hand picked hardware. Not standard shop hardware.
Sorry but the only fan boys are the CPU fans who refuse to admit how bad he CPU is at physics and how a PPU does better physics now today. I don’t see a 1ghz overclocked quad core CPU doing worse then a PPU that’s out now as a win for CPU’s being better at physics.
CPU’s are holding physics back big time. If everyone had PPU’s physics would be way better then what we have now.
EDIT: Unconfirmed but it looks like 7900GTX's where used in the Alan wake demo.
Another thing I should mention is the Alan wake tornado and map was vary sparse compared to UT3. The PPU tornado was a full working map with lots of buildings and people running about firing weapons like a real game. There was far more physics work going on in the UT map then Alan Wake map which was more of a emepty area.
With all the extra objects and players on the screen there must be tons more physics data being processed on the UT3 map compared to the Alan wake map.:EDIT end
“To me while there wasn't background wind the tornado looked a lot more realisitic and the objects interracted a lot more realistically then in the PPU video you posted.”
I really cannot agree. How can the CPU tornado which doesn’t have wind, doesn’t effect surrounding objects be the one that interacts a lot more realistically then the PPU tornado which does have wind, does effect surrounding objects.
Surly the tornado with wind that affects surrounding objects is the one that’s a lot more realistic. At least with the PPU grass and trees are blown by wind while with the CPU the tree just sits there like there’s no tornado.
Forget about the graphical look of the tornado as that’s down to the artists and GPU not the CPU or PPU. The tornado in UT3 has to fit the artist style of the rest of the game.
“It seems that you're just trying to justify the £100 you spent on your PPU.”
It’s got nothing to do with justifying the money spent. It to do with the technology. I try my best to prove my points with facts and people come up with rubbish like but Crisis does all the effects with a CPU the PPU does. Even though I can name a bunch of physics demanding effects Crysis doesn’t do.
Last edited:
That is a shame! Imagine playing countrstrike in a destroyable world online, you could make your own sniper holes in the walls.. truly unique games every spawn!
noadays you begine to learn where *** campers are and its second nature to look in those locations
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 1,629
- Location
- East London
pottsey watch the crysis video of the player leaving the dropship at the start. there is your dirt and crap flying all over the floor. cba to link, just search gametrailers its on there for sure
you mean to say that video showing that nuke effect is all done without hardware accelerated physics
some how i can;t see a physics card being all that good if they haven;t even demoed a nuke effect like the one in crysis.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 10,717
- Location
- InURmama
Was reading a few weeks ago how some geeks are going to make nice Physics with no extra hardware, think its all down to CPU and software.
I still favour the Havok method so do ATI and Nvidia.
I still favour the Havok method so do ATI and Nvidia.
Agreed, unless there's a PhysX miracle.
“some how i can;t see a physics card being all that good if they haven;t even demoed a nuke effect like the one in crysis.”
You have to take into account that’s a tech demo they cannot pull that off in game. Don’t expect to see effects like that in Crysis when/if you buy it.
I still perfew the PPU method its faster then the CPU.
You have to take into account that’s a tech demo they cannot pull that off in game. Don’t expect to see effects like that in Crysis when/if you buy it.
I still perfew the PPU method its faster then the CPU.
