Havok comments on GRAW

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/news...searchid=10096

What interested me the most was that the engine used for the console ports actually uses Havok.

Which comes down to another question. Which is better at handling software physics? Havok or Ageia?

I wasn't impressed with the PC demo at all.

Most interesting part of that article:

AGEIA appears to imply and consumers conjecture that the PPU is generating so many objects that the GPU cannot handle the load. Multiple direct tests on the game by using NVIDIA’s and ATI GPUs indicate the GPU has room to spare and in fact, if the PPU is factored out of the game, that the particle content generated by the PPU can easily be drawn at full game speeds by the GPU. So the introduction of the PPU most certainly appears to be the cause of the slow down in this case. NVIDIA specifically can technically verify that the GPU is not the cause of the slowdown.

Funny, since the "phycis" in GRAW seems to be the same kind of effect physics that HavockFX is all about...
I wonder why they didn't comment on CellFactor ..or do I?

Terra...

Originally Posted by nobi125

I wasn't impressed with the PC demo at all.

The full version is worse. 5 maps for online play? There was 7 servers with a total of 6 people playing. They dont even have TDM yet. Game blows.

Originally Posted by Terra

Funny, since the "physics" in GRAW seems to be the same kind of effect physics that HavockFX is all about...

I think that's pretty much what you can expect to see in the near future... Developers are unlikely to make gameplay dependent on the presence of a PPU until it's widely adopted. Until then it'll probably be limited to effects (and taking the gameplay physics load off the CPU).

But at least they still have the potential to go somewhere with it, unlike Havok's attempt to perpetuate this kind of useless crap.

Originally Posted by Killa_2327

The full version is worse. 5 maps for online play? There was 7 servers with a total of 6 people playing. They dont even have TDM yet. Game blows.

thats almost as lame as red faction 2 not having mp
5 fn maps im sure glad i decided to not pick it up
so was it just dm and did u have any fun playing it sp or mp

Originally Posted by Sly

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/news...searchid=10096

What interested me the most was that the engine used for the console ports actually uses Havok.

Which comes down to another question. Which is better at handling software physics? Havok or Ageia?

Funny that - because I finished GRAW 360 a few days ago and the credits only have the AGEIA logo in them. No Havok to be seen...

Good question about which is better in software mode - Haven't seen anything on that yet. Might be difficult to put two different games that use the two head to head though. Maybe an SDK Iron cage? (they both have demonstration modes)

Looked it up some more but can't find anything other than vague hints at "unparralleled physics system". Marketing bumf

This looks like the start of the next "OMGNOESYOUCANTCLAIMTHAT" war a la Nv/ATi.

Who'd have thought Havok, which stands to lose the most from widespread physics adoption, would try to paint AGEIA black...

"Our own in-house testing has confirmed that GPU's aren't even being fully utilized"

Sound like a plug for HavokFX, anyone?

And using forum comments to validate their statements? Even ATi/NV have never stooped *that* low. What's next? Inquirer articles?

they seemed to say that ATi and Nvidia have done testing and showed the GPU to have headroom to spare. i dont see that as some sort of evil scheme to advertise Havok. seems more like proper testing done to see if there is anywhere things can be improved.

GRAW on the PC is wicked good. Ive blown up stuff just to see what the physics looked like, it was/is impressive. IMHO PC GRAW is very much better than 360 GRAW, which is an excellent game.

The PC version is a giant graphic hog, but is visually stunning.

I think you either like the tactical shooter stuff or you hate it.
I got caught a bunch gawking at the scenery and the banditos nailed me.

Just my 2 cents from my initial 2 hours with the SP portion of the game. It is quite different from the 360.

Originally Posted by magoo

GRAW on the PC is wicked good. Ive blown up stuff just to see what the physics looked like, it was/is impressive. IMHO PC GRAW is very much better than 360 GRAW, which is an excellent game.

You miss the pint.
The "physics" in GRAW, that Havock is "punking" Ageia" for is not gamplay physics(REAL interactive phycis) but effect physics.
The same kind of wannabe-physics that Havock is promoting via HavockFX.
But in HavockFX's case ot the CALULATIONS and the RENDERING would be added to the workload on the GPU.
For what?
More fake debri?

Terra - I would looooooove to see Havock comment on Cell Factor...

The big question is: Is Ageia to blame for GRAW physics, or is ubisoft? Obviously as we have seen in cellfactor, PhysX is capable of much more than its implementation in GRAW, with apparently no slowdown. Could this just be a case of sloppy porting gone wrong? Personally I think that we should point fingers at ubisoft first.

First off, just as I know Terra will agree with me, GRAW as a game is crap. Bring back the Rainbow Sixes/ Ghost Recons of yesteryear

moving on, I agree that the GRAW physics application with the PPU was minimal, and it seems as though it was tacked on as an afterthough. The drivers on the PPU aren't mature, and GRAW isn't taking advantage of what it has to offer. That and it seems like whoever coded the engine decided to take "meh" level graphics and require "wtf" specs to run it decently, even at low resolutions.

As for cellfactor, yes of course it looks good. Yes of course it's far more impressive. Then again, it isn't coming out for ages yet. What does have me a bit disturbed is the framerate in that video...this was what I was worrying about with the PPU from the start. I'm assuming the system they had setup for the (non-optimized by a longshot, not finalized) game was an sli/crossfire rig (why would they want to show it on anything less) and it was STRUGGLING to keep up those FPS. Again, I have to stress that since it's coming out in another year and a bit that hardware will be up to spec then, but it makes me wonder whether because of all these new bits and pieces flying around will require more hardcore specs.

Then again, DX10 and the new card architecture may run a billion objects on the screen at once no problem, but it makes me nervous...

What i got from the interview was that all the ingame physics are done using the Havoc API and that AGEIA is only used for extra particle effects.

Ripped from the article.

'AGEIA Novodex is said to be used in the single-player GRAW version for added PPU-accelerated effects – at the most AGEIA appears to be used for particle effects – and in no-way affects game-play outcome. AGEIA is NOT used in any way in any GRAW sku other than the PC.'

and

'Havok Physics (on the CPU) is used for all game-play physics in both the multiplayer and single-player PC versions of the game. All persistent collidable objects in the game are simulated using Havok software technology running on the CPU. '

So even though the game supports the use of a PPU, its actual use is very limited.

I'm not entirely convinced a PPU is necessary at the moment. I was hoping GRAW would sway me toward buying one and the PPU support was being hyped a lot. But i guess not yet.

As for Cell Factor. I would love to see a comparison of how the game runs with and without a PPU. With the same settings. I.E The same number of objects, effects etc.

If i see proper HARD numbers then i'll be convinced as to the benefits.

Originally Posted by [RCKY] Thor

The big question is: Is Ageia to blame for GRAW physics, or is ubisoft? Obviously as we have seen in cellfactor, PhysX is capable of much more than its implementation in GRAW, with apparently no slowdown. Could this just be a case of sloppy porting gone wrong? Personally I think that we should point fingers at ubisoft first.

I agree that Ubi is probably the main culprit here. However, it probably would have been a wise business decision for Ageia to lend some free help to Ubi to make the physics effects much more substantial. This is a big title after all, so you would think Ageia would be more willing to help make it more impressive, to give the PPU a kick in the pants.

(hopes for good things froum UT2k7)

GRAW is a badly programmed game. Anyone who would take this to be an indication of what the PPU can do, is insane. we won' really go a good indication until unreal 3 and the PS3. I think the PS3 will sell the PPU. I think SONY is going to really hard on the Physics front, because it has a clear and distinct advantage on the Xbox360. This reminds to the voodoo days, when some hardware engine were barely better than the software engines. It was not until games were built on hardware rendering first, and sofware as an afterthough, that 3d graphics really took off, I expect the same progession here, eventually we will get the killer app, that puts the ppu on the map.

Originally Posted by Skirrow

As for Cell Factor. I would love to see a comparison of how the game runs with and without a PPU. With the same settings. I.E The same number of objects, effects etc.

If i see proper HARD numbers then i'll be convinced as to the benefits.

It's as simple as this: The game won't run without it, and I think you can take that to mean it really won't run without it, not it won't let you run without it.

With about 8-17k effects/bodies in motion per frame I just don't think it's possible - quoted somewhere as approx. 60% of the PPU's capacity - but it'd be really interesting to see how this works in software...

Originally Posted by Terra

You miss the pint.
The "physics" in GRAW, that Havock is "punking" Ageia" for is not gamplay physics(REAL interactive phycis) but effect physics.
The same kind of wannabe-physics that Havock is promoting via HavockFX.
But in HavockFX's case ot the CALULATIONS and the RENDERING would be added to the workload on the GPU.
For what?
More fake debri?

Terra - I would looooooove to see Havock comment on Cell Factor...

Well, I dont think I missed anything. I played the game, did you???
Show me interactive physics anyway. Except for the gravity gun in HL2, no one has interactive physics yet.
Cell Factor is not interactive physics. All I saw in that demo was a bunch (oops hit the wrong button)

of boxes flying around....in your words....larger debris.
To me, when a character can pick up a chair and wack someone with it. Pick up a brick and throw it through a window.....thats interaction.
Ageia was an afterthought in GRAW, no doubt. Im sure a ground-up game will look good. But the real question is, can it improve my experience in a meaningful way.
I think the effects in GRAW are some of the best anywhere. Its much better than COD2 or HL2 and I thought those were very good. Im anxious to see what SiN episodes has to offer.

Originally Posted by ikarinokami

GRAW is a badly programmed game. Anyone who would take this to be an indication of what the PPU can do, is insane. we won' really go a good indication until unreal 3 and the PS3. I think the PS3 will sell the PPU. I think SONY is going to really hard on the Physics front, because it has a clear and distinct advantage on the Xbox360. This reminds to the voodoo days, when some hardware engine were barely better than the software engines. It was not until games were built on hardware rendering first, and sofware as an afterthough, that 3d graphics really took off, I expect the same progession here, eventually we will get the killer app, that puts the ppu on the map.

Confused. I remember a story about Sony licensing Ageia technology, but i havent heard anything about them adding a PPU to the PS3. All i heard was that the PS3 would use the Ageia API in games.

Mind you. I havent really been paying a whole lot of attention.

Originally Posted by Skirrow

Confused. I remember a story about Sony licensing Ageia technology, but i havent heard anything about them adding a PPU to the PS3. All i heard was that the PS3 would use the Ageia API in games.

Mind you. I havent really been paying a whole lot of attention.

Since Sony licensed Ageia's tech, more games should be optimized for Ageia's engine. I think what he was trying to say is, let's say a big PS3 game uses Ageia's engine, then it should also benefit from a PhysX PPU if the game is released on PC.