1. Post #1
    Half Life 2: Call of Duty meets Minecraft

    February 2012
    14,305 Posts
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Show Events Winner x 42Dumb x 10Late x 7Funny x 4Disagree x 4Artistic x 1Agree x 1Informative x 1 (list)

  2. Post #2
    Certified Witch - Cutie Department
    Wii60's Avatar
    April 2007
    14,104 Posts
    is physx considered a gimmick or not
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 49Disagree Disagree x 4 (list)

  3. Post #3
    Gold Member
    Stopper's Avatar
    July 2009
    7,233 Posts
    is physx considered a gimmick or not
    Yes, it is still a gimmick.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Bulgaria Show Events Agree x 72Disagree x 15Dumb x 1Informative x 1Funny x 1 (list)

  4. Post #4
    Gold Member
    Mooe94's Avatar
    January 2006
    6,856 Posts
    nvm

  5. Post #5
    Gold Member
    acds's Avatar
    October 2008
    14,978 Posts
    Dunno, I'll gladly take the gimmick then, looks good to me. Considering how close AMD and NVIDIA cards usually come, PhysX can easily tip the balance for Nvidia.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Sweden Show Events Agree Agree x 74Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  6. Post #6
    Gold Member
    WearingNothing's Avatar
    February 2009
    410 Posts
    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...
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 113Disagree Disagree x 3 (list)

  7. Post #7
    Gold Member
    damnatus's Avatar
    October 2006
    5,529 Posts
    Hell yes, gonna max it out on my 580

    And it's considered a gimmick because there aren't many games with big PhysX features, I can remember only Mirror's Edge, Batman AA/AC, and this.

  8. Post #8
    Gold Member
    Silikone's Avatar
    September 2006
    1,374 Posts
    is physx considered a gimmick or not
    It's beautiful and all, but I think it's pretty stupid to have an exclusive proprietary technology that only gets accelerated by GeForce. I mean, couldn't OpenCL do the same job?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Denmark Show Events Agree Agree x 38Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  9. Post #9
    Gold Member
    Scot's Avatar
    March 2007
    15,922 Posts
    I hate this website's shitty video player, just link the youtube version.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Russian Federation Show Events Agree Agree x 55 (list)

  10. Post #10
    Gold Member
    Schmaaa's Avatar
    June 2009
    6,165 Posts
    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...
    there have been tons of games that do this. Pretty much ANY game that has ever used physx does this.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 8 (list)

  11. Post #11
    Gold Member
    damnatus's Avatar
    October 2006
    5,529 Posts
    It's beautiful and all, but I think it's pretty stupid to have an exclusive proprietary technology that only gets accelerated by GeForce. I mean, couldn't OpenCL do the same job?
    It was even more stupid when you had to buy a PCI expansion card for it
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows Vista Russian Federation Show Events Agree Agree x 7 (list)

  12. Post #12
    Gold Member
    WearingNothing's Avatar
    February 2009
    410 Posts
    there have been tons of games that do this. Pretty much ANY game that has ever used physx does this.
    Which is what I mean in general, not just Borderlands.

  13. Post #13
    like..dude..nevermind....fuck
    DarkZero135's Avatar
    July 2011
    4,629 Posts
    mirrors edge had some fucking incredible physx effects
    prob not gonna use it for this though
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 11 (list)

  14. Post #14
    Gold Member
    D3TBS's Avatar
    March 2011
    8,735 Posts
    well it is pretty, but my comp probably won't handle it

  15. Post #15
    Gold Member
    Scot's Avatar
    March 2007
    15,922 Posts
    I thought it looked fucking horrible to be honest. Would way rather play without it.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Russian Federation Show Events Dumb Dumb x 60Disagree Disagree x 8Agree Agree x 7Funny Funny x 3 (list)

  16. Post #16
    Gold Member
    pedrus24's Avatar
    December 2006
    1,454 Posts
    The only thing that look good in that video is the green slim, the rest is just awful. Especially the cloth physics.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 France Show Events Disagree Disagree x 12Dumb Dumb x 8Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  17. Post #17
    Gold Member
    Foda's Avatar
    April 2006
    2,739 Posts
    It's beautiful and all, but I think it's pretty stupid to have an exclusive proprietary technology that only gets accelerated by GeForce. I mean, couldn't OpenCL do the same job?
    Shit, Directx11 has DirectCompute (basically opencl/cuda but runs on ati too) built in! Why didn't they just use that?!
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 6Disagree Disagree x 1Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  18. Post #18
    Mastermind of42's Avatar
    January 2010
    1,101 Posts
    They could touch it up to look less weird.
    For example, the flag in the non-PhysX enabled game is nice and taut but the PhysX enabled game just look like crap.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 2Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  19. Post #19
    Gold Member
    Socram's Avatar
    June 2006
    1,859 Posts
    Why are so many of you crying foul? Isn't the point of proprietary tech to keep clients (including both PC developers and enthusiasts) interested in your product over the competitors.

    As far as the actual effects go, I thought some looked cool but overall there wasn't anything that blew me away. The cloth looked kinda nice though.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 14 (list)

  20. Post #20
    Gold Member
    Foda's Avatar
    April 2006
    2,739 Posts
    Why are so many of you crying foul? Isn't the point of proprietary tech to keep clients (including both PC developers and enthusiasts) interested in your product over the competitors.

    As far as the actual effects go, I thought some looked cool but overall there wasn't anything that blew me away. The cloth looked kinda nice though.
    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.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 18Disagree Disagree x 5Dumb Dumb x 3 (list)

  21. Post #21
    Certified Witch - Cutie Department
    Wii60's Avatar
    April 2007
    14,104 Posts
    my stand alone physx card (before Nvidia bought them) wouldn't work for new games either because nvidia cut them off
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Friendly Friendly x 15Funny Funny x 2Informative Informative x 1 (list)

  22. Post #22
    Gold Member
    Alxnotorious's Avatar
    July 2007
    8,973 Posts
    IMO, this game isn't really meant to be played for the graphics. It's for the co-op, shoot-em-up crazy style of gameplay with cell-shaded, semi-cartoonish graphics and smug sense of humor.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 8 (list)

  23. Post #23
    Gold Member
    Socram's Avatar
    June 2006
    1,859 Posts
    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.
    So why doesn't AMD have an equivalent that they try to push? I still don't really see the issue. Clearly PhysX has some merits or developers wouldn't want to use it at all. It all comes down to competition, and this is how Nvidia (well one of many..) stays on top.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 13Dumb Dumb x 6 (list)

  24. Post #24
    Gold Member
    backfoggen's Avatar
    June 2007
    15,448 Posts
    looks great.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Germany Show Events Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  25. Post #25
    Gold Member
    chills2's Avatar
    August 2007
    1,844 Posts
    A lot of it looks like stuff I wouldn't notice or care about, and honestly, who the hell is going to stop and look at pretty physics in one of the most frantic shooters in recent years?

  26. Post #26
    Gold Member
    chunkymonkey's Avatar
    January 2005
    19,047 Posts
    my stand alone physx card (before Nvidia bought them) wouldn't work for new games either because nvidia cut them off
    I heard about that. Wasn't it because they made newer drivers incompatible with the card? It's really shitty too because PhysX cards were expensive as hell.

    There also used to be a way to trick PhysX into letting you use a nvidia card and an ATI card at the same time and just have the nvidia card do the PhysX crap. Unfortunately they found out that was possible and "fixed" that problem. It's only possible with really old drivers and isn't even guaranteed to work.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  27. Post #27
    Gold Member
    Useful Dave's Avatar
    February 2005
    1,475 Posts
    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...
    To me it looks like they could've spruced up the regular effects more, even if it only meant leaving a decal behind or something. There wasn't even bullet holes left in the examples shown!
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows Vista Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  28. Post #28
    Gold Member
    Silikone's Avatar
    September 2006
    1,374 Posts
    IMO, this game isn't really meant to be played for the graphics. It's for the co-op, shoot-em-up crazy style of gameplay with cell-shaded, semi-cartoonish graphics and smug sense of humor.
    Borderlands is not cel-shaded.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Denmark Show Events Agree Agree x 8Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)

  29. Post #29
    Gold Member
    Stopper's Avatar
    July 2009
    7,233 Posts
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Bulgaria Show Events Dumb Dumb x 7Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  30. Post #30
    garry's Avatar
    September 2001
    12,435 Posts
    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...
    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.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Show Events Agree Agree x 46Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  31. Post #31
    1.21 GIGAWATTS!
    brandonsh's Avatar
    May 2010
    6,567 Posts
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  32. Post #32
    Gold Member
    Stopper's Avatar
    July 2009
    7,233 Posts
    Isn't it just outlines, not cel-shading?
    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.

  33. Post #33
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    September 2007
    17,086 Posts
    Isn't it just outlines, not cel-shading?
    correct
    cell shading makes the difference between light and dark very bold
    so, if a guy is halfway in a shadow, he is literally, by the lighting, halfway in a shadow
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows Vista United States Show Events Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  34. Post #34
    Chewgum`'s Avatar
    September 2011
    44 Posts
    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?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Sweden Show Events Agree Agree x 11 (list)

  35. Post #35
    Gold Member
    Stopper's Avatar
    July 2009
    7,233 Posts
    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?
    Money.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Bulgaria Show Events Agree Agree x 3Dumb Dumb x 2Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  36. Post #36
    I'm a Wizard
    Olas's Avatar
    March 2006
    2,702 Posts
    I hate this website's shitty video player, just link the youtube version.
    Shhh, don't tell anyone
    http://cf.shacknews.com/video/robot/...22b80_720p.mp4
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Mac United States Show Events Winner Winner x 2Useful Useful x 1 (list)

  37. Post #37
    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.
    That still means it's only possible on Nvidia cards, though
    It's a selling point.

  38. Post #38
    Gold Member
    Mooe94's Avatar
    January 2006
    6,856 Posts
    physx: nvidias way of being douchebags and getting away with it
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Sweden Show Events Agree Agree x 20Dumb Dumb x 8Funny Funny x 1Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  39. Post #39
    Gold Member
    Foda's Avatar
    April 2006
    2,739 Posts
    That still means it's only possible on Nvidia cards, though
    It's a selling point.
    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.

    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.
    Hitman had cloth physics using simple verlet and that was in 2003
    http://www.gamasutra.com/resource_gu...cobson_pfv.htm

  40. Post #40

    June 2012
    602 Posts
    Just bought ATI upgrade to play this game with my friends :(
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Canada Show Events Friendly Friendly x 20Funny Funny x 6Agree Agree x 1 (list)