Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
  1. #1
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/art...xaa-and-nvidia

    Yet again NVIDIA brings industry leading features to big titles, and AMD mumbles about "open standards" while telling gamers, "You'll get nothing and like it!".

  2. #2
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by jethro View Post
    http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/art...xaa-and-nvidia

    Yet again NVIDIA brings industry leading features to big titles, and AMD mumbles about "open standards" while telling gamers, "You'll get nothing and like it!".
    I don't see why I should be excited about a closed standard like PhysX. All it does it deprive other gamers of features which could easily be implemented through an open standard. I mean, good for nV that they can put enough cash into devs hands to keep them using PhysX, but I sure as hell won't be standing up clapping about it (I wasn't when I had nV cards either) TXAA and such things are nice, but AMD has their own "new" AA methods. Past a certain point at high resolution I just don't see a difference anymore, so I'm not all that interested in them.


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  3. #3
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    I don't see why I should be excited about a closed standard like PhysX. All it does it deprive other gamers of features which could easily be implemented through an open standard. I mean, good for nV that they can put enough cash into devs hands to keep them using PhysX, but I sure as hell won't be standing up clapping about it (I wasn't when I had nV cards either) TXAA and such things are nice, but AMD has their own "new" AA methods. Past a certain point at high resolution I just don't see a difference anymore, so I'm not all that interested in them.
    I'm not a big AA person either, my monitors are both 25X16. So I agree with you on that.

    I don't agree on the PhysX though. It's up to devs if they want to implement those features with closed or open standards. (or both)

    They aren't exactly falling over themselves to use Open CL, so I'm just glad somebody is stepping up to the plate and giving us some eye candy beyond console games.

    We'd be waiting for this stuff forever if it was up to AMD to fund it. They passed on both PhysX and Havok physics acceleration, or were outbid.

  4. #4
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by jethro View Post
    I'm not a big AA person either, my monitors are both 25X16. So I agree with you on that.

    I don't agree on the PhysX though. It's up to devs if they want to implement those features with closed or open standards. (or both)

    They aren't exactly falling over themselves to use Open CL, so I'm just glad somebody is stepping up to the plate and giving us some eye candy beyond console games.

    We'd be waiting for this stuff forever if it was up to AMD to fund it. They passed on both PhysX and Havok physics acceleration, or were outbid.
    Its up to devs to decide whether they want to take nV's sweet sweet marketing cash, or go the OpenCL route... nV has more invested in PhysX as a brand and as a major selling point, so of course they're throwing money to devs to keep OCL out. At least AMD's solution would be usable by nV as well... its not like we've got dueling proprietary standards, we've got 1 proprietary standard and 1 open standard. Which is better for consumers as a whole? I actually believe that the proprietary nature of PhysX is a detriment to the market as a whole. Why (aside from marketing cash) implement something thats going to take a lot of work when only 50-60% of your market is going even be able to use it?


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  5. #5
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Call of n00b

    First 2 games were great after that it went downhill.

    This is just marketing tactics, activision prolly said "hey Battlefield is with AMD well were gonna be with NVidia"

    As for TXAA im still uncertain, but I personally use SMAA which can be used on either green or red. THe performance is great.
    And as far as TXAA vs heavy SSAA I would like to see a comparison side by side on which looks better.

  6. #6
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    Its up to devs to decide whether they want to take nV's sweet sweet marketing cash, or go the OpenCL route... nV has more invested in PhysX as a brand and as a major selling point, so of course they're throwing money to devs to keep OCL out. At least AMD's solution would be usable by nV as well... its not like we've got dueling proprietary standards, we've got 1 proprietary standard and 1 open standard. Which is better for consumers as a whole? I actually believe that the proprietary nature of PhysX is a detriment to the market as a whole. Why (aside from marketing cash) implement something thats going to take a lot of work when only 50-60% of your market is going even be able to use it?
    Actually it's not marketing cash. It's an SDK to make the job easier, loaned programmers and QA people, hardware, etc.. The reason PhysX gets into the games it does is because NVIDIA makes it very easy for developers to get it in a game by lending the devs people and equipment. (at least that's what they told us at one of the press conferences I went to)

    As none of that stuff is free, I guess you could say they're paying to get PhysX in games. No one is paying for Open CL, and look how many adopt it. AFAIK there's only a couple GTA games and Red Dead Redemption with "Bullet" physics.

    I think I have around 15 games that use PhysX to varying degrees, and it's always nice when new ones come out.

  7. #7
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by jethro View Post
    Actually it's not marketing cash. It's an SDK to make the job easier, loaned programmers and QA people, hardware, etc.. The reason PhysX gets into the games it does is because NVIDIA makes it very easy for developers to get it in a game by lending the devs people and equipment. (at least that's what they told us at one of the press conferences I went to)

    As none of that stuff is free, I guess you could say they're paying to get PhysX in games. No one is paying for Open CL, and look how many adopt it. AFAIK there's only a couple GTA games and Red Dead Redemption with "Bullet" physics.

    I think I have around 15 games that use PhysX to varying degrees, and it's always nice when new ones come out.
    Open CL, keyword Open which means its open source

  8. #8
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by jethro View Post
    Actually it's not marketing cash. It's an SDK to make the job easier, loaned programmers and QA people, hardware, etc.. The reason PhysX gets into the games it does is because NVIDIA makes it very easy for developers to get it in a game by lending the devs people and equipment. (at least that's what they told us at one of the press conferences I went to)

    As none of that stuff is free, I guess you could say they're paying to get PhysX in games. No one is paying for Open CL, and look how many adopt it. AFAIK there's only a couple GTA games and Red Dead Redemption with "Bullet" physics.

    I think I have around 15 games that use PhysX to varying degrees, and it's always nice when new ones come out.
    Sooo, you've said nothing that contradicts my point. nVidia is paying devs to put PhysX in.. if they weren't we'd probably see more Open CL games. If its the difference between a pile of "resources" (money, things that cost money, it makes no difference) and marketing/advertising support, and nothing, they'll obviously take the free stuff. You keep saying "devs have a choice", but if its apples to apples, they might very well choose Open CL because it would be usable by a wider audience. The point you're either missing or avoiding is the fact that nVidia is throwing their weight behind a proprietary standard NOT because its good for gamers, but because its good for them. I get that, it sells them video cards, but I'm not going to be sitting here saying "look how great nV is because they're advancing gaming". They aren't. They're stifling competition with marketing money and support and depriving gamers of next-gen physics because it shrinks the potential user base. I would prefer Open CL to succeed not simply because I have AMD video cards (right now) and want physics, but because it would open it up to more players regardless of the brand they buy and speed adoption. Proprietary standards don't help gamers.
    Last edited by Activate: AMD; 09-01-2013 at 12:37 AM.


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  9. #9
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Actually what I'm saying is that if NVIDIA didn't pay for it to happen, the physics effects wouldn't be added to games at all.

    You're presuming the games would have been done with OpenCL if NV had not been available for free help.

    I'm assuming the only reason the additional coding happens is because NV gives the free help.

    These are two different things.

    Given that OpenCL physics would appeal to 100% of gamers and not just NV gamers, don't you think some devs would either just refuse NVs help and use that, or develop the Open CL physics to use as an alternative? And yet no one does.

    This tells me devs have little interest in doing the work to add gpu accelerated physics, and the only people who do are the ones with a financial interest in doing so.

    http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...buying_ageia/1

    AMD considered buying Ageia and Havok, and did not because they had no money. We all know the end of the story, intel bought Havok and shelved it. (although who knows as they are entering the gaming graphics arena what will happen there- they may use it as a marketing tool yet) And NVIDIA bought Ageia and kept developing PhysX and using it as a marketing tool.

    Given a choice between companies with money giving me something, and no one doing it, I'll take the former. And that is why I'm happy NV helps bring this to market- because it looks like we wouldn't have it if they didn't.
    Last edited by jethro; 09-01-2013 at 01:54 AM.

  10. #10
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    BTW- this is a lot like 3D Vision. I used to game with it all the time, to the extent I even bought two 3D Vision Surround sets.

    Have several games NV helped devs enhance for 3d.

    Should I be angry devs didn't take the brand agnostic route and use that crappy tri def? Or glad NV pushed a standard and made a better version of it for their users?

    If AMD had put some money into it, I would have bought their solution if it was better, but they sat on the side lines yelling about open standards while NV did something about it.

    I don't work for free, I don't see why game devs would.

  11. #11
    Joined
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Colorafornia, USSA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    13,817

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Meh, Physx isn't enough to sway me one way or another. I'll take the best card for the buck and even take what games come with it into consideration as well. I couldn't care less about TXAA.

  12. #12
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by kbohip View Post
    Meh, Physx isn't enough to sway me one way or another. I'll take the best card for the buck and even take what games come with it into consideration as well. I couldn't care less about TXAA.
    Exactly. Nvidia has to pay devs to get their "exclusive" tech to work in games.

    And the only ppl that care about CoD series nowadays are pimply faced 13 year olds, a lot of them had a few neurons and came to battlefield which has destroyed the battlefield community but in any case, Battlefield will still remain the superior game. So who cares about CoD
    Last edited by Poci; 09-01-2013 at 04:52 AM.

  13. #13
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by kbohip View Post
    Meh, Physx isn't enough to sway me one way or another. I'll take the best card for the buck and even take what games come with it into consideration as well. I couldn't care less about TXAA.
    Dunno Kbohip, PhysX definitely adds to the game experience:



    The game without PhysX looks pretty old hat, with PhysX it's impressive. AMD is giving us the same graphics we've been looking at since DOOM, while NVIDIA is spending millions to give us something the console gamers can't have because the feeble Jaguars in next gen consoles could never handle that much processing on top of the game itself.

    PhysX is the kind of stuff that makes being a computer gamer better.

    It's not just about the money, or we'd have all kept our stone age CRTs and bought AMD Kmart Blue Light Special computers.

    I hear you on the value thing though, the two 7970s I bought were the best deals I've ever gotten on high end cards over 20 years of computer gaming. AMD is giving away their parts lately to stay in the market.

  14. #14
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by jethro View Post
    Dunno Kbohip, PhysX definitely adds to the game experience:



    The game without PhysX looks pretty old hat, with PhysX it's impressive. AMD is giving us the same graphics we've been looking at since DOOM, while NVIDIA is spending millions to give us something the console gamers can't have because the feeble Jaguars in next gen consoles could never handle that much processing on top of the game itself.

    PhysX is the kind of stuff that makes being a computer gamer better.

    It's not just about the money, or we'd have all kept our stone age CRTs and bought AMD Kmart Blue Light Special computers.

    I hear you on the value thing though, the two 7970s I bought were the best deals I've ever gotten on high end cards over 20 years of computer gaming. AMD is giving away their parts lately to stay in the market.
    I agree that physx is nice but it should NOT be exclusive to NVidia only, AMD had to create Open CL physics to compete and it divides the gaming community even more. As far as AMD giving same graphics since Doom, uhh no comment....
    And the only problem with CRTs as what both me and Meridian said in another post, the weight. The image quality especially in 3d images is still superior.

  15. #15
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    553

    Re: Call of Duty: Ghosts will have PhysX and TXAA, NVIDIA exclusives

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    I agree that physx is nice but it should NOT be exclusive to NVidia only, AMD had to create Open CL physics to compete and it divides the gaming community even more. .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL

    OpenCL was initially developed by Apple Inc., which holds trademark rights
    Before PhysX was purchased by NVIDIA, it was exclusive to Ageia. Ageia and NVIDIA have spent millions on development of PhysX, why would they give it to competitors like AMD for free?

    Based on that logic, I think you should get some part time jobs, and pay tuition for others in your area to get the tech certifications you are going to be working on. It's fair to spend your resources to help your competitors, right?
    Last edited by jethro; 09-01-2013 at 09:21 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •