[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;46319342]my card can barely the video[/QUOTE]
My card can barely cs:go already
do i win?
This would be a godsend in ArmA
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;46328026]This would be a godsend in ArmA[/QUOTE]
Assuming you can run it above 10 FPS that is.
Apparently arma runs shittier indoors than it does outdoors? The way I've been told it's pretty much an unoptimized hunk of shit graphically
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;46324792]This would be as mentioned before by some and in the video, an amazing way to track player movements in large scaled battle games.
It'd also mean that you'd have to take precaution yourself because there's sure to be another person following your tracks as well[/QUOTE]
Invisible tag.
[QUOTE=DropDeadTed;46328358]The way I've been told it's pretty much an unoptimized hunk of shit graphically[/QUOTE]
Pretty much.
I'd love to see this in Arma 3. But probably not gonna happen.
Looks awful.
The grass pressing down looks cool but when you zoom out, it looks really unappealing.
[QUOTE=!LORD M!;46325724]Why would you run anything else? So it doesn't matter.[/QUOTE]
Are you advocating a monopoly?
[QUOTE=proch;46319073]That's the kind of shit I thought was gonna be a standard in 50 years 5 years ago.[/QUOTE]
it kinda still will be because whenever cool shit like this is tech demo'd it never ever ever appears in games.
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;46328944]Are you advocating a monopoly?[/QUOTE]
While the comment itself was pretty dumb, a monopoly isn't exactly bad. Companies and individuals would not be willing to innovate if there wasn't some kind of guarantee that they could be the sole maker of their invention for at least a period of time. That is why government issued monopolies (patents) exist. Otherwise we wouldn't have all these great electronic devices, medicines, utilities... etc.
It could be argued that technology like this cannot sell well unless it is made available to all manufacturers but it seems questionable as doing so would be effectively allowing your competitors to mooch off of your investment into R and D.
[QUOTE=Lord of Ears;46322379]i wonder if we'll ever actually see this in any games[/QUOTE]
of course, just wait for farm simulator 2017
Its nvidia, we got physx we might get this too.
[QUOTE=cdr248;46328878]Looks awful.
The grass pressing down looks cool but when you zoom out, it looks really unappealing.[/QUOTE]
Anything is better than the grass we have in games now
2d shitty textures randomly splotched in groups on the terrain
The shading seems off at the last part where they zoom out. It bounces around
[QUOTE=PredGD;46319110]wouldn't that just worsen the situation so to say? I don't want to feel like I have to buy a nvidia GPU to make use of nvidia's "exclusive" stuff (unless you can tolerate subpar performance with AMD), and I wouldn't be very happy if I felt that way about AMD too
correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly sure nvidia hasn't opened up to let AMD utilize their technology at all[/QUOTE]
I don't really care about exclusives in this case. Competition is good.
[QUOTE=Magman77;46327366]Don't provoke the AMD users, LORD M. :v:[/QUOTE]
AMD isn't up there on efficiency (and they should get their asses off the ground), but last generation they held both the performance and the price crown most of the time. !LORD M!'s suggesting was just stupid, that's all.
The GTX 970/80 are looking mighty fine, though.
being an exclusive nvidia user, I want AMD to succeed as well as nvidia. I even wish there was a third alternative
why?
cheaper cards, and better cards.
otherwise the market would be FUCKED.
also people saying "X should let Y use their tech" is being dumb
why the hell would/should nvidia let amd touch shadowplay/g-sync/etc that's the silliest thing ever said by anyone
[QUOTE=Magman77;46327366]Don't provoke the AMD users, LORD M. :v:[/QUOTE]
Seems like I unintentionally did. I just thought it would be better for everyone, since it got physx n such and AMD doesn't.
[QUOTE=!LORD M!;46342500]Seems like I unintentionally did. I just thought it would be better for everyone, since it got physx n such and AMD doesn't.[/QUOTE]
physx is generally over rated and not even used that much and all nvidia cards only basically means cards will be more costly and there would be, in the long term, no competition for them to care
[QUOTE=!LORD M!;46342500]Seems like I unintentionally did. I just thought it would be better for everyone, since it got physx n such and AMD doesn't.[/QUOTE]
PhysX really isn't used that widely, and if you're on a budget you'd generally prefer performance over extra features. There isn't a one size fits all.
Nvidia cards generally do feel more exclusive, though.
This could be a technology more like the PhysX dev tools remember. It's a dumb naming scheme but there's the PhysX everyone knows about that does the gimmicky effects that only work properly on nvidia cards, and there's the dev tools like PhysX Apex Cloth simulation and a bunch of others which works perfectly fine on AMD. I'm hoping TurfEffects will come under that cause it's awesome tech and I want support for it in UE4.
[QUOTE=J!NX;46342497]why the hell would/should nvidia let amd touch shadowplay/g-sync/etc that's the silliest thing ever said by anyone[/QUOTE]
Thing is AMD already had "shadowplay" on their cards, they just don't seem to use it.
[QUOTE=LittleBabyman;46320522]i read that as nVidia TurdEffects
[editline]24th October 2014[/editline]
accidentally and all[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube;LeAdkH5hRNk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeAdkH5hRNk[/video]
Now how long is it going to take to appear in games?
[QUOTE=Usernameztaken;46350233]Now how long is it going to take to appear in games?[/QUOTE]
I doubt it will appear ever outside of maybe 1-2 games that Nvidia funds.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
