Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Richey79

PhysX

Recommended Posts

Yeah i strongly agree with MadDog....An ability to Enable/Disable should be used for alot of things, specially with what I am talking about! I hope Dev's are paying mind to this thread. This thread has some great ideas from great people in it!

Is there some sort of ticket(?) or something that people vote for to have Fixed/Added to the game? If not we need one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will physX enable more complex vehicle handling?

Not talking collisions but traction, suspension etc.

I know there is basic suspension effects in ARMA2 which can be seen in the humvees

but the traction is very unrealistic (and boring to drive)

I would like to see more sliding and wheel spins on dirt. This would make driving require more skill and give greater definition between surfaces. ie tarmac or sand etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will physX enable more complex vehicle handling?

Not talking collisions but traction, suspension etc.

I know there is basic suspension effects in ARMA2 which can be seen in the humvees

but the traction is very unrealistic (and boring to drive)

I would like to see more sliding and wheel spins on dirt. This would make driving require more skill and give greater definition between surfaces. ie tarmac or sand etc.

Thats something else i think would be add to realisim, Not to mention riding Dirtbikes and Quads so much more fun! I think that for the most part the possiblitys of this PhysX feature can be endless...with some work of course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thumbs up for realistic driving. Lets see if RV would be a good racing game engine ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thumbs up for realistic driving. Lets see if RV would be a good racing game engine ^^

I can see it already: Take On Race Cars!

takeonallthethings.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Batman AA is the worst example of a PhysX bad implementation ,see :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqAWYiop3nA

Performance issues is a another problem, SPH (or particle effects) performance is concern in CPU mode (aka Radeon Users).... =(

Edited by D3lta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can a BIS Dev confirm if something simular will be featured in Arma3? Meaning "Cloth" Physics, or what ever its called?

Dave,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly at this stage, i don't see cloth physics being in the game. It's a visual bonus that doesn't offer anything to the game other than more work for the hardware. Not to say it wouldn't make things look nice with some atmosphere, but in the ArmA series at this time it probably wouldn't be a good idea. We're already getting ragdoll, vehicle, and buoyancy physics which is more than I ever expected from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can a BIS Dev confirm if something simular will be featured in Arma3? Meaning "Cloth" Physics, or what ever its called?

Dave,

no need for a dev to confirm: there won't be cloth physics in A3...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no need for a dev to confirm: there won't be cloth physics in A3...

Not even on flags? :p

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to have ragdoll animation on radeon card and maybe some rivers or streams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's not going to be a difference in physics between ati and nvidia in arma 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not even on flags? :p

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

The wind sock in Take On Helis is pretty realistic, there was no mention of PhysX being used either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not even on flags? :p

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

That's not physics driven but a simple animation playing over and over again with the speed depending on wind strength.

_neo_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not physics driven but a simple animation playing over and over again with the speed depending on wind strength.

_neo_

You are wrong:

class CfgCloth
{
class Flag
{
	//stepSize = 0.002; // high end - perfect stable
	stepSize = 0.005; // stable
	//stepSize = 0.01; // nearly stable
	//stepSize = 0.02; // slightly unstable
	colPoints = 14; // number of knots in x-direction
	rowPoints = 14; // number of knots in y-direction

	stretchCoef = 1000;  // stretch force coeficient
	fricCoef = 1; // friction coeficient
	windCoef = 20; // wind coeficient
	gravCoef = 1; // gravity coeficient
};
};

Stability refers to physics going crazy, usually due to a too slow simulation interval, ie stepSize, (too much cloth stretching between cycles, over-penetration etc). If it were an animation or a simple "plasma" pattern, instead of being driven by physics, it would not go unstable at any playback rate. It doesn't have collisions, but it has some physics.

Edited by Pulverizer
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've asked it before, but I just want to be clear:

1) Physx will produce the same physics on AMD/ATI cards in ArmA3, correct?

I am assuming this is true, as it uses software Physx opposed to GPU.

2) Will AMD see a performance hit?

I believe it will, because AMD cards that run software Physx are held back if I recall correctly, meaning that a an Nvidia/AMD card that are otherwise equally fast will show a slight performance increase in the Nvidia cards performance.

If that is wrong, correct me.

I am looking at getting either a GTX 560ti 2GB or HD 69502GB, and I wish I knew what the performance difference was in ArmA 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've asked it before, but I just want to be clear:

1) Physx will produce the same physics on AMD/ATI cards in ArmA3, correct?

I am assuming this is true, as it uses software Physx opposed to GPU.

2) Will AMD see a performance hit?

I believe it will, because AMD cards that run software Physx are held back if I recall correctly, meaning that a an Nvidia/AMD card that are otherwise equally fast will show a slight performance increase in the Nvidia cards performance.

If that is wrong, correct me.

I am looking at getting either a GTX 560ti 2GB or HD 69502GB, and I wish I knew what the performance difference was in ArmA 3.

PhysX will run on CPU, it doesn't matter which GPU you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Yes.

2. I don't think so.

Using GPU physics for simple rigid bodies and such can actually slow down the performance because a part of the GPU stream processors will not be available for graphics rendering, but are wasted on a task a CPU would be easily capable of. Case in point, Shattered Horizon.

The advantage of GPU physics is realized when you have massively parallel physics. Like the stuff you see in Mafia II, Mirror's Edge, Batman and the like with GPU PhysX enabled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
physx will run on cpu, it doesn't matter which gpu you have.

+1000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using GPU physics for simple rigid bodies and such can actually slow down the performance because a part of the GPU stream processors will not be available for graphics rendering, but are wasted on a task a CPU would be easily capable of. Case in point, Shattered Horizon.

But no body actually tried and see what will happen, right?:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people experimented with it in SH, but I don't have a clue if BIS has done so with A3. Probably?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many people experimented with it in SH, but I don't have a clue if BIS has done so with A3. Probably?

Nope, will be cpu only.

And gpu physX usually doesn't really slow the rendering down, the added particles means there is more rendering to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope, will be cpu only.

And gpu physX usually doesn't really slow the rendering down, the added particles means there is more rendering to do.

Yeah, A3 will most likely be CPU only. That doesn't mean BIS couldn't test how the performance would be with GPU physics.

And unless you have more information about their own game than Futuremark, you are wrong about "added particles" being the reason for the slowdown in Shattered Horizon. SH doesn't add anything with GPU PhysX enabled, it simply runs the same stuff on either GPU or CPU. I think Trine is similar, no difference between visuals even though it supports both CPU and GPU PhysX.

For many other games, the statement would be somewhat true however.

Edited by Pulverizer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once read on the trine forum they couln't get physx to run stable on the gpu, maybe they've fixed it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×