New Darkest Of Days PhysX Comparison Video(Full Version)

Those smoke scenes are awesome...say goodbye to consoles...or AMD cards :p:D
 
yeah the physX looks nice in the game.. wish they had put a little more detail in the people.. though i think they over did it a little on the leaves.. because i kept having to turn physX off for a few of the maps just because i couldnt see anything with all the leaves flying around..
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
yeah the physX looks nice in the game.. wish they had put a little more detail in the people.. though i think they over did it a little on the leaves.. because i kept having to turn physX off for a few of the maps just because i couldnt see anything with all the leaves flying around..
Click to expand...

I agrre the leaves are overdone and should be tomed down.
But that smoke is nice...now more of that..and interactive water :D
 
Atech said:
I agrre the leaves are overdone and should be tomed down.
But that smoke is nice...now more of that..and interactive water :D
Click to expand...

i loved the smoke.. was bad ass walking through the corn fields and not actually being able to see the end of them.. then the enemy running through the smoke at you firing away..

with physX off in that section all you see is soldiers running through the field.. doesnt have the dramatic feeling that it does with the smoke.. though i have a feeling a lot of people will play with the physX off.. since it makes the game easy as hell with it off.. no fog or smoke to block your view.. now if only my poor 8800GT could handle having the physX on high with AA on at the same time..
 
  • The ash looks pretty cool. Does add a little more depth to the situation of the erupted volcano.
  • The 'blowing leaves' looks horribly fake. I've never in my 28 years been walking outside and seen any leaves blowing like that. Completely 'tacked on' to show off a bunch of worthless particle effects.
  • Leaves breaking off the corn looked pretty cool. A good example of what PhysX is capable of adding.
  • For Smoke and dust .. another tacked on feature. Smoke and Dust/Fog has been done for years without PHysX. And it seems like they simply remove the smoke and dust/fog from the non-physX which is the same game they played with Batman. Purposely removing something that can be done without PhysX, then adding it back in saying you need to buy PhysX to get it. Not buying it ... Also, the scene where the soldiers are fighting in the ditch, and it shows PhysX on/off, I can't tell the difference.
  • Smoke from gunfire looks better without PhysX. With it on it looks like like an 80 year old man losing at a pissing contest
  • Impact debris looks good but over used in some spots. Metal Shavings from shooting a can? Come on ..
  • Artillery fire and missiles look good.

Overall opinion ... another game that takes away something that can be done with the CPU and says you need to buy a PhysX capable GPU to get it back. Now, if you can show me a game that gets poor performance because of the graphics on a lower end machine, but gains a nice FPS boost from the PhysX being enabled, then I'll shut my mouth (0-30FPS going to 40-60FPS +)
 
bigdogchris said:
Overall opinion ... another game that takes away something that can be done with the CPU and says you need to buy a PhysX capable GPU to get it back. Now, if you can show me a game that gets poor performance because of the graphics on a lower end machine, but gains a nice FPS boost from the PhysX being enabled, then I'll shut my mouth (0-30FPS going to 40-60FPS +)
Click to expand...

its weird, beause pc manufacturers are moving away from fast cpu's in favor of multi-tasking gpu's. especially in laptops, they are finding that a gpu can do many of the things a fast cpu can do, only much cheaper. they are shipping core 2 solo chips at 1.4ghz, but its hardly and issue because deticated nvidia CUDA graphics take care of so many things you hardly ever notice the slower cpu. the only time it becomes a real problem is encoding video and watching streaming HD content...
 
bigdogchris said:
  • For Smoke and dust .. another tacked on feature. Smoke and Dust/Fog has been done for years without PHysX. And it seems like they simply remove the smoke and dust/fog from the non-physX which is the same game they played with Batman. Purposely removing something that can be done without PhysX, then adding it back in saying you need to buy PhysX to get it. Not buying it ... Also, the scene where the soldiers are fighting in the ditch, and it shows PhysX on/off, I can't tell the difference.
Click to expand...
Show me interactive smoke (NOT SCRIPTED) in a none PhysX game...I dare you.
 
Last edited:
Crysis.
World in Conflict.
BioShock
Any XNA game can have it.
Any torque game can have it.
Then you got the silly DirectX tech demo.

Quite sure there are others.
 
jeremyshaw said:
Crysis.
World in Conflict.
BioShock
Any XNA game can have it.
Any torque game can have it.
Then you got the silly DirectX tech demo.

Quite sure there are others.
Click to expand...

I said SHOW me...words are easy...'
Smoke in Crysis does not react to your movements, only the enviroment....not interactive.
Do you understand the terms:
"interactive smoke"
"scripted smoke"
?
 
Fine then.

World in Conflict.

Soft Particles.

Download the demo, blow something up, and put a helicopter over it.
Lower the camera angle. and tell me that is scripted.

Also, one of the developer video states the fact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az9negXp6c0
I had a little bit of trouble in finding this video. Ubisoft (new owner), removed all the videos without the Ubisoft logo in them.

I use:
Atech said:
"interactive smoke"
?
Click to expand...

in Softimage.

It's trouble to simulate, made more difficult without 3Ds Max's flow editor (just a UI prefference for me, maybe it is easier...).

But with enough deflectors... and decent hardware (hint for campus techs/finance), then it's going to work.


EDIT: I had a feeling some person is going to say: 'oh yeah, with Physx hardware you can simlutate soft particles".

What I meant is out school has P4s (first generation...) with ancient V3100 graphics cards. 6 years ago = purchase time.
Decent hardware meant my previous build with a Phenom X4, and a Radeon 4550 - the primary station I used before I donated it to the campus 3D Animation Club.

(by the way, I also used ODE... not Physx [though they are not used for particles... hint]).
 
Last edited:
jeremyshaw said:
Fine then.

World in Conflict.

Soft Particles.

Download the demo, blow something up, and put a helicopter over it.
Lower the camera angle. and tell me that is scripted.

Also, one of the developer video states the fact.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az9negXp6c0
I had a little bit of trouble in finding this video. Ubisoft (new owner), removed all the videos without the Ubisoft logo in them.

I use:


in Softimage.

It's trouble to simulate, made more difficult without 3Ds Max's flow editor (just a UI prefference for me, maybe it is easier...).

But with enough deflectors... and decent hardware (hint for campus techs/finance), then it's going to work.


EDIT: I had a feeling some person is going to say: 'oh yeah, with Physx hardware you can simlutate soft particles".

What I meant is out school has P4s (first generation...) with ancient V3100 graphics cards. 6 years ago = purchase time.
Decent hardware meant my previous build with a Phenom X4, and a Radeon 4550 - the primary station I used before I donated it to the campus 3D Animation Club.

(by the way, I also used ODE... not Physx [though they are not used for particles... hint]).
Click to expand...


Show me it ingame, as APC's don'st react with smoke:
http://picasaweb.google.dk/AtechVideo/LogitechWebcam#5380633355258463314


Like I said ...words are easy.
 
krupted said:
its weird, beause pc manufacturers are moving away from fast cpu's in favor of multi-tasking gpu's. especially in laptops, they are finding that a gpu can do many of the things a fast cpu can do, only much cheaper. they are shipping core 2 solo chips at 1.4ghz, but its hardly and issue because deticated nvidia CUDA graphics take care of so many things you hardly ever notice the slower cpu. the only time it becomes a real problem is encoding video and watching streaming HD content...
Click to expand...
Yeah but the #'s released also shows GPU processing is anywhere from 4-10x more expensive than CPU processing ... in terms of development cost. Plus, cpu's are not exactly unable to "keep up with the times". Within the past couple of year's we've gone from single to 4-6 core cpu's, with 8 core on the horizon. And I don't have a problem with GPU doing work for you, like you pointed out. I just have a problem with requiring people to buy an additional tacked on GPU, simply for a few effects that can be done on the cpu. And you're not really getting anything extra for it for it in terms of 'new' or 'extra performance'.

Atech said:
Show me interactive smoke (NOT SCRIPTED) in a none PhysX game...I dare you.
Click to expand...
Show me how walking through smoke/fog "pushes" it out of your way, like it actually has enough viscosity to do that ... I dare you.
 
Atech said:
Show me it ingame, as APC's don'st react with smoke:
http://picasaweb.google.dk/AtechVideo/LogitechWebcam#5380633355258463314


Like I said ...words are easy.
Click to expand...

Well...

In your hero's (OP) demo video...
I didn't see bullets pushing smoke out of the way.

Show me that... Like you said. Words are easy.
Not everything is interactive...

All WiC videos are rendered realtime, in game, by the game engine, not prerendered.
Helicoptors can, mostly to all to visual pizzaz from DX10 and the fact they have rotors blowing on the smoke.

Note, smoke camo is heavy... heavy. One cannot just 'blow' on it and expect it to move out of your way, like light oil smoke will.
Afterall... was Directx 10 even enabled in the video you linked?



And saying DX10 is just like Physx, a software/hardware prerequisite...
Well, DX10 is available on all current generation GPU.

S3 Chrome has DX10,
Intel GMA has DX10 (the gma 950 doesn't count, due to it being from 2005, when DX10 wasn't announced yet)
nVidia 8xxx and above
ATi HD2xxx and above
The Apple iPhone/iPod touch (generation 3.0 and up) - bet'ya didn't see that comming!

While Physx is limited to:
nVidia 8600 and above (8xxx series)
nVidia 9500 and above (remainder)
 
Last edited:
bigdogchris said:
Show me how walking through smoke/fog "pushes" it out of your way, like it actually has enough viscosity to do that ... I dare you.
Click to expand...

Why don't you back up your claims first.
Crysis: Debunked
WiC: Not happening

Why don't you restate what claims you have left, so I don't have to guess what you claims are now?
 
jeremyshaw said:
Well...

In your hero's demo video...
I didn't see bullets pushing smoke out of the way.

Show me that... Like you said. Words are easy.

Not everything is interactive.

All WiC videos are rendered by the game engine, not prerendered.
Helicoptors can, mostly to all to visual pizzaz, and the fact they have rotors.

Note, smoke camo is heavy... heavy. You cannot just 'blow' on it and expect it to move out of your way, like light oil smoke will.
Afterall... was Directx 10 even enabled?
Click to expand...

You are barking up the wrong three...during 2½ years service (2 missions under the belt) I learned what smoke is...and isn't...and no there isn't enogh påhyscis in that video, I agree...but it is a hell of a lot better than most other games, that rely on scripted physics...so it is far from perfect..and your point was?
 
okay, I just rewatched the video...OP

Who even did the particle animations!?

I have never seen something that bad outside of the default explosions in Softimage.

Even putting the smallest amount of work into the game, and Physx fanatics wouldn't be the sole selling point.

But now, it is.
 
Atech said:
Why don't you back up your claims first.
Crysis: Debunked
WiC: Not happening

Why don't you restate what claims you have left, so I don't have to guess what you claims are now?
Click to expand...

You didn't even look at my post.

WiC was 'debunked' based off of your singular test of an APC going through smoke. (with unknown graphics settings).

You didn't even watch the video I linked.
 
Atech said:
You are barking up the wrong three...during 2½ years service (2 missions under the belt) I learned what smoke is...and isn't...and no there isn't enogh påhyscis in that video, I agree...but it is a hell of a lot better than most other games, that rely on scripted physics...so it is far from perfect..and your point was?
Click to expand...
Your whole point is now what?
Physx IS scripted physics.

Hit here, bounce there.
Move here, displace there.

The only difference is scale (macro/nano).
 
If you wanted me to 'restate my claims'.

Your question:
Show me interactive smoke (NOT SCRIPTED) in a none PhysX game...I dare you.

Well... WiC.
Watch the video. goto the end if you cannot sit still long enough for the Helicoptor scene.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az9negXp6c0

Crysis..
Fine then.
It's not interacting with 'you', but it is interacting with the enviorment.
What part of that is scripted?
 
There is nothing in that demo that is sweet, never mind awe-inspiring. Almost all of those effects can be (and have been) done in other games without the use of PhysX. This is just like the Arkham Asylum PhysX trailers - nothing was at all impressive with the hardware physics. They just ended up stripping out these "unique" effects instead of rendering them in another way to give the illusion that PhysX added "so much more." Back to Darkest of Days, the game's graphics look like crap (worse than a present-day console port) and the fact that the game appears to be shit (reading IGN's review) just aims at the fact that NVIDIA is releasing another techdemo with the facade that it is a "game." Whoever is in their marketing department needs to be fired ASAP, people are not this stupid, unless NVIDIA really is this desperate. What I'm curious to see is how deep NVIDIA's pockets are; how long can they keep this exclusive stuff up? Furthermore, if I extrapolate, why are they trying so hard? Has the 58xx cards really gotten them that nervous and they are that desperate?
 
People always said that PhysX will improve gameplay so I guess that without PhysX, this game won't hit the shelves at all.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/102/1023108p2.html
Darkest of Days indeed. This first-person shooter from 8monkey Labs fails on nearly all fronts. A promising narrative setup is roasted over a bonfire of mangled mechanics, poor presentation, and sloppily implemented missions and objectives. The dynamics of the large scale firefights the game offers are wrecked by erratic and unbelievable enemy behavior, and the poor visuals certainly don’t help. With more development time and a more clever use of the time-traveling concept, this could have been an interesting shooter. As it is, it’s an arduous trip on which nobody should embark.
Click to expand...
 
Mr. K6 said:
There is nothing in that demo that is sweet, never mind awe-inspiring. Almost all of those effects can be (and have been) done in other games without the use of PhysX. This is just like the Arkham Asylum PhysX trailers - nothing was at all impressive with the hardware physics. They just ended up stripping out these "unique" effects instead of rendering them in another way to give the illusion that PhysX added "so much more." Back to Darkest of Days, the game's graphics look like crap (worse than a present-day console port) and the fact that the game appears to be shit (reading IGN's review) just aims at the fact that NVIDIA is releasing another techdemo with the facade that it is a "game." Whoever is in their marketing department needs to be fired ASAP, people are not this stupid, unless NVIDIA really is this desperate. What I'm curious to see is how deep NVIDIA's pockets are; how long can they keep this exclusive stuff up? Furthermore, if I extrapolate, why are they trying so hard? Has the 58xx cards really gotten them that nervous and they are that desperate?
Click to expand...


The graphics weren't crap.

After all, you might notice World in Conflict has similar graphics.


Oops...


World in Conflict is a RTS/RTT.

From 2007.

On a console (48 shader cores ftw!),

Without Physx.


and it has better physics.

It has real terran deformation.
and NONSCRIPTED, soft particles (i.e., interactive smoke).

It also looks like a DX10 game should (of that time), unlike this Halo 1 gfx ripoff.
 
Last edited:
all the daring in this thread reminded me of playing "who can find the hidden pickle" in 2nd grade
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top