PhysX

[Leon86 13]

Are you going bonkers? APEX destruction FTW!

YOUTUBE]1iyNXD1nhXs[/YOUTUBE]

but does that run on all pc's?

Edited June 20, 2012 by [FRL]Myke

[[frl]myke 14]

@Leon86

just as a friendly reminder:

§14) Remove tags when quoting a post containing an image or embedded video

If you quote a post that contains an image please remove the image tag or the whole image, it helps keep the thread tidy and easier to read if the same image isn't being posted repeatedly, you need only delete one [ to stop the image from hotlinking. If the post contains an embedded video such as YouTube you should remove the tags so the image of the video is not shown in your quote.

[Timnos 1]

but does that run on all pc's?

If your concerned about performance you can disable PhysX.

[neokika 62]

If your concerned about performance you can disable PhysX.

No, ofc you cannot disable physX...

[maddogx 13]

More like "disable APEX PhysX". (If they even use it, which is still anything but confirmed.)

[Dingo8 1]

In some games where it's purely for eye candy, you can switch PhysX off completely. In others it performs some core functions plus eye candy, and only the latter can be switched off. Arma 3 will definitely use PhysX for vehicles, ragdolls and objects such as crates. There may also be additional eye candy that otherwise doesn't affect gameplay. I think it's highly unlikely they'd allow anything but the eye candy to be switched off, if it's implemented, especially given that it'd break multiplayer compatibility.

[Timnos 1]

No, ofc you cannot disable physX...

Incorrect. Virtual Battlespace has upgraded physics models that support PhysX for long time now.;)

[Dingo8 1]

Incorrect. Virtual Battlespace has upgraded physics models that support PhysX for long time now.;)

VBS is for an entirely different audience. They don't have to worry about fracturing the multiplayer community by making core features optional, right?

[Leon86 13]

More like "disable APEX PhysX". (If they even use it, which is still anything but confirmed.)

in mafia 2 you can run the apex thing on the cpu too. Performance is terrible because they went a bit overboard with the effects, but apex on the cpu is possible.

so if they use it, which they might or might not, it could be sortof mandatory, very unlikely ofc.

[neokika 62]

In some games where it's purely for eye candy, you can switch PhysX off completely. In others it performs some core functions plus eye candy, and only the latter can be switched off. Arma 3 will definitely use PhysX for vehicles, ragdolls and objects such as crates. There may also be additional eye candy that otherwise doesn't affect gameplay. I think it's highly unlikely they'd allow anything but the eye candy to be switched off, if it's implemented, especially given that it'd break multiplayer compatibility.

PhysX != APEX. :)

[Dingo8 1]

PhysX != APEX. :)

Ah, my bad. I thought it was part of PhysX.

[Leon86 13]

Ah, my bad. I thought it was part of PhysX.

It is, but not an essential part. Most games with the PhysX logo do not use APEX, but use other parts of PhysX for essential gameplay elements, this cannot be turned off. APEX is usually limited to eyecandy and can be turned off.

[Zogrim 10]

APEX is usually limited to eyecandy and can be turned off

It really depends on implementation - APEX itself is well optimized for CPU/consoles, but so far was used mostly for GPU accelerated eye candy (which one is meant to run perfectly on GPU only).

Point is, if devs will announce that ARMA 3 will use, for example, APEX Destruction module to add destructible buildings to the battlefield, there will be no reason to panic.

Also, do not worry about main physics layer - like character controller, vehicle physics, ragdolls - this types of calculations do not support GPU acceleration in PhysX SDK, so it will run on any CPU/system in any case

[navy198523 10]

So is this physx thing bad or good???? I'm know a little bit about computers but nothing about program engines.

[neokika 62]

So is this physx thing bad or good???? I'm know a little bit about computers but nothing about program engines.

Very, very good, not only for gamers but also for developers.

[sqb-sma 66]

So is this physx thing bad or good???? I'm know a little bit about computers but nothing about program engines.

Physx is a very, very good physics engine (currently playing Project Cars with it, and the cars feel VERY good... actually, does anyone know if physics from a game like PCars could be ported to another game running Physx3?) so this is good news. There was some concern that the game was using APEX, the GPU side of Physx, which only runs well on Nvidia cards but others have explained that at least the core engine will run equally well on both ATI and NVidia.

I'd be interested to see little APEX implementations here and there, akin to Planetside2, just for videos and screenshots. (even though I'm an ATI user...)

[minicus 1]

Physics still need to be improved, but they are probably going to improve on full release.

[froggyluv 2130]

Was doing some AI observing and testing on the hillside by Kill Farm when I keep seeing something moving thru the bushes. I kept chasing to see what it was and when I finally found it -twas an AT from a dead soldier rolling all the way down the mountainside -is this new?! Awesome :)

[Smurf 12]

So I way playing a mission yesterday and killed 2 guy on the roof of a building, then 3 problems:

a) (related to this thread) A single Explosive Charge (wasn't even the Satchel Charge wich is more powerfull) destroyed the WHOLE building;

b) (this thread) The corpses of the dudes killed in the roof stood there, floating in the air, I beleive its PhysX related?;

c) When I was like "wtf?" and when to check the situation another soldier who survived the building colapse killed me.

Full report with details and screenshots when I come back to home, those are known problems?

Edited August 22, 2013 by Smurf

[JohnnieConcrete 1]

Nvidia is the superior graphics card, AMD is substandard un less you get the high-end cards and even then they only perform as good as mid-range Nvidia cards

[RushHour 11]

Physx is a very, very good physics engine (currently playing Project Cars with it, and the cars feel VERY good... actually, does anyone know if physics from a game like PCars could be ported to another game running Physx3?) so this is good news. There was some concern that the game was using APEX, the GPU side of Physx, which only runs well on Nvidia cards but others have explained that at least the core engine will run equally well on both ATI and NVidia.

I'd be interested to see little APEX implementations here and there, akin to Planetside2, just for videos and screenshots. (even though I'm an ATI user...)

PhysX simulates some parts like when the car is airborne or visual effects like marbles, leaves etc. The actual physics engine does not have PhysX.

As far as PCARS physics....well i should probably not say anything.

[Pyrophosphate 1]

Nvidia is the superior graphics card, AMD is substandard un less you get the high-end cards and even then they only perform as good as mid-range Nvidia cards

I would direct you to read your own signature.

I wonder why the devs (any devs, not necessarily Arma devs) would choose PhysX when they don't use the GPU-accelerated stuff. What's the benefit over any other physics engine?

[aoshi 1]

Arma is infamous for a heavy cpu game, so a gpu physix looks nice for media,and maybe nvida pay something too? But the execution, I don't like the way cars are too weightless and have anti roll systen, and have some dificultys to go uphill, and the ragdoll,it really no interaction with bullets hits only with explosions