Borderlands 2 PC video shows off fancy PhysX effects - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Stopper;37273459][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cel-shaded_video_games[/url][/QUOTE] Isn't it just outlines, not cel-shading?

[QUOTE=brandonsh;37273515]Isn't it just outlines, not cel-shading?[/QUOTE] Well, I guess it's a bit of both. Technically all the textures are hand-drawn, and then the outline is added. Which is pretty much what cel-shading is supposed to look like. But it doesn't actually use the cel-shading rendering mechanics. I don't have a clue anymore.

The effects with physx are actually kinda a huge leap between not having it. Kinda sucks for people without nvidia cards. Why couldn't they have made something similar with another library?

[QUOTE=Chewgum`;37273636]The effects with physx are actually kinda a huge leap between not having it. Kinda sucks for people without nvidia cards. Why couldn't they have made something similar with another library?[/QUOTE] Money.

[QUOTE=Scot;37272390]I hate this website's shitty video player, just link the youtube version.[/QUOTE] Shhh, don't tell anyone [url]http://cf.shacknews.com/video/robot/7bf05539b2032da3be8a274e1e522b80_720p.mp4[/url]

[QUOTE=Foda;37272793]The point is that they attempt to convince people that it's ONLY possible on Nvidia's cards because only Nvidia cards are good enough. In reality, Nvidia just paid Gearbox a lot of money to make them use their tech rather than a tech that can run on a wide range of systems.[/QUOTE] That still means it's only possible on Nvidia cards, though It's a selling point.

physx: nvidias way of being douchebags and getting away with it

[QUOTE=latin_geek;37273838]That still means it's only possible on Nvidia cards, though It's a selling point.[/QUOTE] OpenCL and DirectCompute work on both ATI and Nvidia cards and does the same exact thing (GPGPU, physics on the GPU). It's just incredibly dick and lazy. [QUOTE=garry;37273475]Agree. It looks like they just haven't bothered to make the effects any good for non physx systems. It's like making your game not have any textures unless you have an ATI card. It's an artificial advantage.[/QUOTE] Hitman had cloth physics using simple verlet and that was in [I]2003[/i] [url]http://www.gamasutra.com/resource_guide/20030121/jacobson_pfv.htm[/url]

Just bought ATI upgrade to play this game with my friends :(

[QUOTE=Mooe94;37273895]physx: nvidias way of being douchebags and getting away with it[/QUOTE] I fucking hate how I'm stuck at a specific driver version or else it disables PPU support. Not only is it Nvidia-specific but it also is version specific if you want to use the older accelerator cards.

Cloths always look out of place with physx. However the fluid shit looked awesome with that black hole grenade thing

like to see a proper comparison and not something that is trying to sell the 660

I don't know why you guys get all upset over this PhsyiX isn't anything thats a super major feature for you to miss out on it. It's literally nothing more than a nice addition to the particle effects for those who have nvidia cards. Playing with PhysiX is one of those things that looks slightly more cooler/neat for the first few hours of playtime, but after that it's back to being a gimmick. Especially since they only use PhysiX for particle effects these days - something that never impacts gameplay on any real level.

[QUOTE=KorJax;37274699]I don't know why you guys get all upset over this PhsyiX isn't anything thats a super major feature for you to miss out on it. It's literally nothing more than a nice addition to the particle effects for those who have nvidia cards. Playing with PhysiX is one of those things that looks slightly more cooler/neat for the first few hours of playtime, but after that it's back to being a gimmick. Especially since they only use PhysiX for particle effects these days - something that never impacts gameplay on any real level.[/QUOTE] Because the particles and stuff without PhysX look really lame. They put all the effort into the particles that Nvidia is paying them to put in, then went over to the ones without PhysX and said 'Eh, whatever'. Obviously they are thinking about getting more money from Nvidia then actually caring about their player base, as they could have done the same things with existing tools that work on both cards.

You do know you can run PhysX on the CPU too even if you have a amd/ati card? Don't know how it performs.

PhysX looks cool, but I think its too much for the style of Borderlands. Cool feature, but I'm not gonna use it.

i dont get it, what looked bad about the cloth physics guys? looks fine to me.

[QUOTE=TyHap;37275437]PhysX looks cool, but I think its too much for the style of Borderlands. Cool feature, but I'm not gonna use it.[/QUOTE] The only thing that remotely fit is piles of slag, but even that just looked off. PhysX is a manufacturer-specific gimmick and that's that.

[QUOTE=Foda;37272793]The point is that they attempt to convince people that it's ONLY possible on Nvidia's cards because only Nvidia cards are good enough. In reality, Nvidia just paid Gearbox a lot of money to make them use their tech rather than a tech that can run on a wide range of systems.[/QUOTE] Uh, yeah, because implementing a custom physics system in OpenCL is just as easy and cost effective as dropping in PhysX support and is totally worth the effort. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;37275455]i dont get it, what looked bad about the cloth physics guys? looks fine to me.[/QUOTE] The cloth is way too 'light' if anything

[QUOTE=Strikebango;37275406]You do know you can run PhysX on the CPU too even if you have a amd/ati card? Don't know how it performs.[/QUOTE] It performs very poorly, hence why the Ageia card was made.

[QUOTE=Strikebango;37275406]You do know you can run PhysX on the CPU too even if you have a amd/ati card? Don't know how it performs.[/QUOTE] It's not worth trying it to be honest. Even the high end CPUs struggle to keep up with the GPU implementation. Just because GPUs are that much faster at the calculations required. Perhaps one day there will be an abstraction layer in a big engine that allows a developer to implement both PhysX and OpenCL at the same time. Rather than them being two entirely different things with different implementations.

What was that thing where... oh what was it, where if you ran ATI, Source shadows looked amazing, and everyone not running ATI cried and threw a fit. However, it's perfectly okay when nVidia does it.

[QUOTE=WearingNothing;37272348]My biggest problem with this is that its essentially telling half the playerbase who aren't on Nvidia cards that they aren't important enough to get any fancy particles or physics. There shouldn't be that much of a divide...[/QUOTE] those filthy amd dirtbags are a plague on this earth, gearbox will lead our glorious platform in to a new age and remove them from our homes, workplaces and seedy back room titty bars. they're already in the process of setting up labor camps, and rumors are circulating within our inner circle of one final solution to the amd plague [editline]16th August 2012[/editline] god bless america

[QUOTE=Arkantos;37276271]What was that thing where... oh what was it, where if you ran ATI, Source shadows looked amazing, and everyone not running ATI cried and threw a fit. However, it's perfectly okay when nVidia does it.[/QUOTE] I don't like the prospect of having to pick a manufacturer to get a set of graphical features. I like variety, but when developers start using hardware-specific software we have a problem. Admittedly AMD is geared towards people with stricter budgets, but forcing exclusivity with things like PhysX... I really, really don't like it.

[QUOTE=KorJax;37274699]I don't know why you guys get all upset over this PhsyiX isn't anything thats a super major feature for you to miss out on it. It's literally nothing more than a nice addition to the particle effects for those who have nvidia cards. Playing with PhysiX is one of those things that looks slightly more cooler/neat for the first few hours of playtime, but after that it's back to being a gimmick. Especially since they only use PhysiX for particle effects these days - something that never impacts gameplay on any real level.[/QUOTE] The fact that it's a gimmick is BECAUSE it's proprietary. You can easily make a game that depends on the PhysX and incorporates into gameplay, but it'll shut out 54% of their potential PC gaming audience that doesn't have a Nvidia card. Open standards like OpenCL with Bullet physics should mature until they can do the same stuff as PhysX on any GPU, if they can't already. I'm not too familiar with the state of the art. [editline]17th August 2012[/editline] Hell the [url=http://clbenchmark.com/compare.jsp?config_0=11905561&config_1=11905948]latest AMD cards are better at GPU computing than their latest Nvidia counterparts[/url], just nobody's using it in games yet.

this game is ugly as sin

[QUOTE=Clavus;37277804]Hell the [URL="http://clbenchmark.com/compare.jsp?config_0=11905561&config_1=11905948"]latest AMD cards are better at GPU computing than their latest Nvidia counterparts[/URL], just nobody's using it in games yet.[/QUOTE] That's because the graphics card already has enough to do in games, putting more on to the gpu will probably just slow things down. You'll notice that these benchmarks are not necessarily game related, that's because gpgpu is more interesting for non game use. Also forgive me if I am wrong but nvidia cards have dedicated hw for physx right? So it has some point of existing. Whether game developers are assholes and only put effort in to physx features is pretty much another argument.

My favorite game with Phyx enabled is Mirror's Edge.

[QUOTE=Philly c;37278161]That's because the graphics card already has enough to do in games, putting more on to the gpu will probably just slow things down. You'll notice that these benchmarks are not necessarily game related, that's because gpgpu is more interesting for non game use. Also forgive me if I am wrong but nvidia cards have dedicated hw for physx right? So it has some point of existing. Whether game developers are assholes and only put effort in to physx features is pretty much another argument.[/QUOTE] From what I understand, GPGPU does have its dedicated components on AMD cards too. Nvidia skimped on these during the design of their 600 series so they could keep the price down while still delivering great gaming performance. But that's just what I've read.