Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Physics in the right direction.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 8:53:10 PM

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/10/01/the-most-impress...

i'm impressed. hopefully next gen engines would be able to apply all physics effect across the map not just to select objects.

and please no "it doesn't do anything, i can't feel this or that", it's a physics effect not a vibrator (like what most physics engine detractors here believe)



and to think crysis 3 would include something like this. epic, epic indeed.

More about : physics direction

a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:00:45 PM

cant wait to try this :p 
hopefully it wont require an arm and a leg to run, but i remember soft body physics in cinema 4D couldn't run fluidly on my PC
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 9:38:31 PM

Doesn't this just add more objects for the physics to be applied to? Instead if a single truck(1 object) it is a truck made up of many objects each being affected by the physics in the environment.

What kind of processing power would this need for a racing game with several cars going around the track? Would this add to the motion sickness that some people already get in games? It looks impressive, but so does a 3-d model of a beating human heart. I just wonder how much this will cost in terms of FPS in games.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
October 2, 2012 10:10:42 PM

^i'd guess tons, from what i've seen of soft body physics so far it's a very demanding task for a PC
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 3:46:31 PM

BigMack70 said:
What exactly is a "physics engine detractor"? :lol: 


the great "physx" debacle of '09 had a bunch complaining "physx" is useless since they cannot feel the "visual" effect.

if this will push cpu to its limits then good. im pretty sure you guys get pretty icky when a console port comes out and nothing to differentiate a pc release from it. crysis 3 will feature this. next gen is next gen indeed.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 3, 2012 5:38:17 PM

wh3resmycar said:
the great "physx" debacle of '09 had a bunch complaining "physx" is useless since they cannot feel the "visual" effect.

if this will push cpu to its limits then good. im pretty sure you guys get pretty icky when a console port comes out and nothing to differentiate a pc release from it. crysis 3 will feature this. next gen is next gen indeed.

I really never saw a difference with Physx enabed, just caused more lag for me :p ... i wonder if there is GPU benchmarks for soft-body physics
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 7, 2012 8:39:36 PM

BigMack70 said:
Physics are awesome but PhysX is crap.

Looking forward to seeing what Crysis 3 brings to the table... I doubt it will be truly "next gen" though, since it will have to run on consoles... kinda like BF3 and Crysis 2.

Personally, I think the first full on UE4 game will be the first truly next-gen game (the one they've announced doesn't count IMO - it's not going for realism).


here's the things

people will say bf3 and crysis 2 were bad console ports. in terms of gameplay yes. but in terms of graphics, there's this trend that when it multiplatform it's immediately a bad console port.

my first playthrough with crysis 2 was on the PC boy it was awesome. try playing it on the 360 and the only way i can "stomach" the game was when i'm a good 5 to 6 feet away.

people make it sound like when a game is multiplatform there's like an emulation layer running the same code from the console through the PC, it isn't. there's a world difference between a bf3/crysis on a console vs on a PC. now if you can't determine nor distinguish the differences, which are massive, something is wrong with the end user not the devs.


but i still commend crytek for pushing boundaries unlike activision. to me that's money well spent.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 7, 2012 9:29:25 PM

BigMack70 said:
The fact that those games look like crap on console doesn't have anything to do with my point. Consoles render games at some horrid slightly-less-than-720p resolution. If you put Crysis 2 to that resolution on your PC you'd have to sit 5-6 feet away too, even if you didn't turn settings down to console quality (medium/low).

My point is that Cryengine 3 and Frostbite 2 aren't graphical revolutions at the level of a generation change - it's just not a generational jump in my view. Why do I say that? Because you can run games using those engines on current gen consoles. Can't do that with Unreal Engine 4.

Also, I'd say that this "generation" of PC graphics was defined by Crysis back in 2007, and I'd say that we're only beginning to move substantially beyond what was offered back then. I think that we'll only be fully beyond that with UE4. Crysis 2 and BF3 are definitely better looking but it's not the same type of difference as, say, the difference between Crysis and Half Life 2 (which is the type of difference that to me indicates a generational change).


if cryengine 3 manages a good implementation of soft-body physics i would call that "revolutionary"
m
0
l
!