Should Witcher 3 use PhysX instead of Havok?

[Agent_Blue]

pointless . Havok is way better .

In which way?

I know Skjyrim uses Havok and I was mighty pleased with its physics. But can you tell of a specific instance where Havok would do a better job than PhysX? And isn't PhysX hardware dependant?

Havok will be rolling out a new version at GDC 2013.

 

[courierseven]

I was hoping for Havok too, but if you want to use all it's features it will cost you around 100k $ for one game title(don't quote me on that since it is under NDA and there is no fixed price before you sign it),while Nvidia PhysX is free. Anyway, my next card might just be Nvidia if there are more games that use PhysX in the future.

 

[Agent_Blue]

I was hoping for Havok too, but if you want to use all it's features it will cost you around 100k $ for one game title(don't quote me on that since it is under NDA and there is no fixed price before you sign it),while Nvidia PhysX is free. Anyway, my next card might just be Nvidia if there are more games that use PhysX in the future.

I currently own an AMD card. Does that mean I won't take full advantage of TW3's physics/Physx?

 

[courierseven]

I currently own an AMD card. Does that mean I won't take full advantage of TW3's physics/Physx?

In a way, yes. If you don't have Nvidia card you can still use PhysX but all the work must be done by CPU and if the game already use most of your CPU there is litle left for PhysX so you need to disable or use minimum settings for it since PhysX was built mainly for GPU use and not CPU like Havok. That's why Havok would be better for everyone with AMD and not that much of a drawback for Nvidia users with a decent CPU as PhysX is for AMD card users.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

You have to differentiate between normal gameplay physics simulation and GPU-accelerated eyecandy. The gameplay-relevant (interaction with the environment, ragdolls etc.) parts of Physx are always run by the CPU, only things like fluids or additional particles and cloth are passed on to the GPU. So you're only missing some visual effects, not gameplay elements (for example pushing enemies around with the aard, or something like that )

 

[Agent_Blue]

You have to differentiate between normal gameplay physics simulation and GPU-accelerated eyecandy. The gameplay-relevant (interaction with the environment, ragdolls etc.) parts of Physx are always run by the CPU, only things like fluids or additional particles and cloth are passed on to the GPU. So you're only missing some visual effects, not gameplay elements (for example pushing enemies around with the aard, or something like that />)

What I got from your reply, the takeaway, is this:

Start saving.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

What you should take away: CDPR hasn't even stated yet if they will implement GPU-accelerated effects (apart from cloth - I think they said Apex cloth simulation will be integrated). But with a fast CPU (i7 3770K-fast) this should still work fluently when it's run on the CPU.

 

[pomidoroff]

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
PhysX support only Geforce, what do the owners of other cards? This is 50% of gamers.
FFFFFFFFFFFFFUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu /> Hate this proprietary shit!

 

[CostinRaz]

This is 50% of gamers.

Load of BS on several levels.

First off AMD accounts for less then 40% of gamers but that's overall numbers but you witcher fans number can vary greatly on that.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

Load of BS on several levels.

First off AMD accounts for less then 40% of gamers but that's overall numbers but you witcher fans number can vary greatly on that.

He's also right on several levels. With Physx being proprietary, gamers don't profit from it the way they could. The one part as it won't run on their cards in the first place, the other part as Physx is damned to a niche existence with hardly a handful of titles using its potential.

 

[Daywalker30]

Well the next gen consoles will be using AMD graphic cards, so the future multi platform games will be optimized for amd cards, so you'd have to take more or extra resources and time add physX support.

 

[Aaden]

Well the next gen consoles will be using AMD graphic cards, so the future multi platform games will be optimized for amd cards, so you'd have to take more or extra resources and time add physX support.

The Xbox360 uses an ATI graphics chip, too. So that obviously doesn't mean anything.

For the moment, there isn't much to worry about. Most of the physics will run nicely on any PC as its computed by the CPU. If CDPR will use GPU PhysX is not confirmed, yet, and if they will, it will be eyecandy of unknown quality (most devs achieved bad results with hardware PhysX, imo, as their effects were way over the top. Only positive example I know of are the Batman games). There most likely will be a low setting for GPU PhysX, too, which current upper mid-range to high-end CPUs will be capable of handling nicely - CPUs have lots and lots of resources to spare in recent years, and I don't think that will change anytime soon.

 

[Aver]

I will be really disappointed if it's true. CDPR could already stop cater Nvidia and start using solutions that can be fully used by all their consumers, especially now when Havok introduced GPU computed physics that works on both type of cards. Choosing one part of customers over another is not the way to go. />

 

[CostinRaz]

Choosing one part of customers over another is not the way to go.

Ignoring the Nvidia PhysX they are already restricting themselves by using DX11 only, but you know what I agree with them. Graphical quality of a game should never come at cost that some people don't have X GFX card or X OS and it's not like you can't play the game if you have an AMD card, it just will run better on Nvidia if you have PhysX on.

With regards to Havok vs PhysX, whatever the merits of Havok ( and until someone comes along to tell me it's easier to program cloth with Havok then I won't believe it's true ) the reality is that Nvidia does send engineers to help game developers implement specific technologies in their games, like TXAA or Cloth animation and particle effects.

 

[Aver]

With regards to Havok vs PhysX, whatever the merits of Havok ( and until someone comes along to tell me it's easier to program cloth with Havok then I won't believe it's true ) the reality is that Nvidia does send engineers to help game developers implement specific technologies in their games, like TXAA or Cloth animation and particle effects.

And do you really think that Intel doesn't provide such support for Havok? Read Havok site and quotes of devs that praise it. They clearly mention how supportive Intel engineers were.

And don't tell me bullshit about "game should never come at cost that some people don't have X GFX". You would sing differently, if they would do the same with nvidia.

 

[CostinRaz]

They clearly mention how supportive Intel engineers were.

Then give me a good clear reason why developers are using Nvidia PhysX instead of Havok for cloth. There has to be one for using such technology which restricts versus one which doesn't, either developer issues or financial considerations.

And don't tell me bullshit about "game should never come at cost that some people don't have X GFX". You would sing differently, if they would do the same with nvidia.

You clearly don't know me at all then. No I would not sing differently.

 

[Aver]

Then give me a good clear reason why developers are using Nvidia PhysX instead of Havok for cloth. There has to be one for using such technology which restricts versus one which doesn't, either developer issues or financial considerations.

Games that used Havok's cloth simulation: 8
Games that used Physx's cloth simulation: 7

You clearly don't know me at all then. No I would not sing differently.

Last time when you didn't liked something, you started screaming that you wont buy TW3.

 

[CostinRaz]

Games that used Havok's cloth simulation: 8
Games that used Physx's cloth simulation: 7

Batman: AA, Borderlands 2, Mafia 2 and Crysis 3, and that's just from memory, what games exactly used Havok Cloth?

Last time when you didn't liked something, you started screaming that you wont buy TW3.

Last time I checked that something wasn't of a technical or graphical nature, it was of a story quality nature.

 

[Aver]

Last time I checked that something wasn't of a technical or graphical nature, it was of a story quality nature.

Of course I can't be sure, but I bet that if they would announce that part of physics wouldn't work on Nvidia you wouldn't be whining.

 

[CostinRaz]

I'd likely get myself and AMD card next year then if they decided to do that Hell I hope they will get TressFX in the game from AMD and use it even if it runs very badly on Nvidia cards. Or hey get some form of hair simulation and that would be awesome but I suppose it would be such an irony to have a game that on one hand has cloth simulation from Nvidia and then has hair simulation from AMD.