PDA

View Full Version : Will PS3 use Phys X at any point?



LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 15:40
I just noticed the Phys X logo (never paid attention before) when I just started up Fat Princess. Will Phys X be available or at some point be available for PS3?

EliteF50
18th Aug 2009, 15:41
It is available on some games.

Batz-R-Us
18th Aug 2009, 15:44
You mean for B:AA? Dont think so...

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 15:47
Yea for Arkham Asylum. I didn't know the system could use it. Seems now like something that could be at least added with an update. I know it's definatly not a deal breaker for me not having it...would just be nice. ;>

iamtombombadil
18th Aug 2009, 15:48
And here we............GO.

Cirap
18th Aug 2009, 15:50
so far it's only a very scaled down use of PhysX in a few games. you probably won't be seeing the same effects as PC titles with hardware accelerated PhysX can do

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 16:09
And here we............GO.

Heh, what did I do to deserve a movie quote oh Tom Bombadil of the forest? ;>

jaywalker2309
18th Aug 2009, 16:18
The unreal engine uses Physx for all its physics ingame.. so the console versions USE Physx in that respect, however its NOT the same as the enhancements the PC version is getting. Make sense?

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 16:21
The unreal engine uses Physx for all its physics ingame.. so the console versions USE Physx in that respect, however its NOT the same as the enhancements the PC version is getting. Make sense?

I see what you're saying...but are the enhancements impossible to pull off on a console?

*Edit*
I also understand the side of a company being...hey, we have this product 100% done, let's move on to the next thing too. Plus the PC probably being by far, the easiest one to make additions on etc.

EliteF50
18th Aug 2009, 16:23
I see what you're saying...but are the enhancements impossible to pull off on a console?

Yes. Take a look at Gears of War 2. It had destructible pillars and moving paper, as well.

jaywalker2309
18th Aug 2009, 16:25
I see what you're saying...but are the enhancements impossible to pull off on a console?

Not really no..

VXR
18th Aug 2009, 16:31
Not really no..

so, its not impossible to do............. you all have just CHOSEN not too.

very interesting .

Ensanguined Walls
18th Aug 2009, 16:39
so, its not impossible to do............. you all have just CHOSEN not too.

very interesting .

You're simplifying it quite a bit, which is rather disappointing. They could have had development constraints, and the PC is undoubtedly able to handle more complex additions from PhysX without noticeable slowdown. Who cares about some added smoke, moving paper, and tiles that unrealistically break apart like foam?

The PS3 and 360 versions already look superb.

Batman The Trailer Hunter
18th Aug 2009, 16:42
You're simplifying it quite a bit, which is rather disappointing. They could have had development constraints, and the PC is undoubtedly able to handle more complex additions from PhysX without noticeable slowdown. Who cares about some added smoke, moving paper, and tiles that unrealistically break apart like foam?

The PS3 and 360 versions already look superb.

What he said!!!! Besides sometime stuff like PhysX laggs the game...atleast thats what happenes to me

VXR
18th Aug 2009, 16:45
again, there are SEVERAL other ps3 games in which this works FINE.

so, it is not a simplification of it.
its more along the lines of FACT.

Ensanguined Walls
18th Aug 2009, 16:47
again, there are SEVERAL other ps3 games in which this works FINE.

so, it is not a simplification of it.
its more along the lines of FACT.

Did all of those PS3 games face the same development restraints that Rocksteady could have encountered? Do all PS3 developers share the same vision? Do all PS3 developers have the same amount of resources, development time to properly implement said features, etc?

Didn't think so.

sd921
18th Aug 2009, 16:49
again, there are SEVERAL other ps3 games in which this works FINE.

so, it is not a simplification of it.
its more along the lines of FACT.

yea but why are we getting annoyed with not getting minor little added effects added for the console version to me its no big deal it looks cooler but really its just meh

Batman The Trailer Hunter
18th Aug 2009, 16:50
again, there are SEVERAL other ps3 games in which this works FINE.

so, it is not a simplification of it.
its more along the lines of FACT.

Although the Op mentions PS3, what about the xbox?

sd921
18th Aug 2009, 16:52
Although the Op mentions PS3, what about the xbox?

i read somewhere on cnn(i know of all places) that the PS3 has the physx already incorporated into it i think that the 360 has it too but i would have to find and read the article again

VXR
18th Aug 2009, 16:54
Did all of those PS3 games face the same development restraints that Rocksteady could have encountered? Do all PS3 developers share the same vision? Do all PS3 developers have the same amount of resources, development time to properly implement said features, etc?

Didn't think so.

you cant end a statement with ' didnt think so' without giving someone a chance at re buttal.

in the 3-4 times the game was pushed back or delayed because they wanted to pimp it off @ E3, or comic con, or some guys bar in london.... they COULD have had as much time, or MORE than enough personel. and the term POLISH as WE were given SEVERAL times for reasons of being delayed, THIS certainly falls within that category.

but , you didnt think of that, did you.

didnt think so. :rasp:

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 16:54
You're simplifying it quite a bit, which is rather disappointing. They could have had development constraints, and the PC is undoubtedly able to handle more complex additions from PhysX without noticeable slowdown. Who cares about some added smoke, moving paper, and tiles that unrealistically break apart like foam?

The PS3 and 360 versions already look superb.

I agree, the game definatly looks great on both systems. I think it comes down to...we need to get this program out of the door and make some $$. Nobody can blame ANYONE for that. The game is finished. You're programing on a PC it seems natural that transfering the extra content to the PC is the easiest option...that's why I wondered if it could be available in an update. Hell, I'd fork over a little extra cash for this game for that. I'd rather have it as is looking great then have another delay, that's for sure. ;> $5.00 for an update with the added visuals...I'd drop that cash in a heartbeat...but how many others would do that. Would it be worth the cost in manpower to make those changes? Tough choices I for one am glad I'm not in the position to make. :D

Batman The Trailer Hunter
18th Aug 2009, 16:54
i read somewhere on cnn(i know of all places) that the PS3 has the physx already incorporated into it i think that the 360 has it too but i would have to find and read the article again

CNN can kiss Batmans Boot! TFU had good use of havok even though the game sucked, i woulnd mind having that in B:AA

VXR
18th Aug 2009, 16:55
Although the Op mentions PS3, what about the xbox?

being the xbox charges people for everything else, i wouldnt doubt this will be part of your DLC..... getting the game to run properly, lol. ;)

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 16:55
yea but why are we getting annoyed with not getting minor little added effects added for the console version to me its no big deal it looks cooler but really its just meh

I myself am not annoyed. But it wouldn't hurt my feelings if we got it sometime down the road. ^_^

sd921
18th Aug 2009, 16:58
I myself am not annoyed. But it wouldn't hurt my feelings if we got it sometime down the road. ^_^

ya it would be good but its not on my wish list of updates for the game, im just hoping for DLC with new challenge maps and stuff, thats cooler than having some fog and breakable tiles

E.Nygma
18th Aug 2009, 17:00
I don't care that much about more PhysX, if all it really does is adding some fog and make the walls as easy to break as if they were made of papier-mache....?
However, I'd be curious to know the motivation of its absence in both of the console versions. May that have been to give the pc version something extra?

Strife2k7
18th Aug 2009, 17:28
It was probably a performance balancing choice. IE: Yes you'd gain the effects but other areas might suffer degradation. That in addition to the extra time it would take to implement the effects made it more cost effective to go without them.

Look at all the awesome scores the game is getting thusfar, granted there will be some that will be lower than the 90+ range we're seeing now but if implementing those effects were to cost you the smooth framerate the game has when you go through those areas, or a decrease in other details we see all the time would it really be worth it? Framerate is something most gamers and reviewers harp on constantly, so that may have lowered scores and sales all for the sake of a few extra effects. Are they pretty? Yes, but only if the framerate doesn't chug when they're in use. I don't /know/ that this is why it was done, it's speculation, but from a business point of view it makes sense to give the consumer the highest quality product possible in the time allotted for development. Seems to me that's what they've done.

The added effects the PC version is getting probably have less overall impact on the game's stability due to the scaleability of the Unreal 3 engine on PC. If you have the power you can run it at settings that would make Michael Bay jealous. If not, you can scale it to still run very smoothly on whatever system you have by tweaking those effects. That ability doesn't exist for consoles. Hence, make the game as good as it can possibly be on the hardware you're given with the time you have.

In theory, sure, you could maybe spend another 6 months on tweaking in order to add those effects in, but you look at the cost of adding 6 more months of development time to a game that's finished and it just isn't worth it. You keep tacking on additional costs without significant improvements and people are going to get upset. Specifically the people financing the game's development. Also take into consideration how you'd feel if they announced today that the game was delayed until December or January to implement these effects seamlessly on consoles. People were outraged when the announcement of the demo release date slipped by 4 days... a delay like that would cost Eidos and Rocksteady game sales.

Just think about all this from their point of view, from a business point of view, before thinking about how it makes you feel personally.

LoboUDL
18th Aug 2009, 18:09
I think you said pretty much what I said...but with more words. :D

Strife2k7
18th Aug 2009, 18:11
Sometimes I just feel like exposition. :)

ChristianBaleBatman
18th Aug 2009, 20:09
Okay, so...I'm a noob to this Phys X.

From what I've read here on this thread, all it does is add smoke and moving paper? I'm sure there's more to it than that. But, what COULD it add to a game?

And...I thought The Force Unleashed seemed good. I was thinking about picking it up in a few months...

edit: Thanks for that post too, Strife. Quite informative.

E.Nygma
18th Aug 2009, 20:13
That was an insightful post, Strife. Thanks for the informations! Everything you stated there as the motivation for the lack of PhysX effects on the console versions, seem pretty plausible.

Strife2k7
18th Aug 2009, 20:21
Well, PhysX is, as Jay mentioned, actually being used for the physics calculations. It's what the unreal3 engine uses by default. The added effects are just boons of having the extra memory dedicated to video processing and the scaleability of the unreal engine on a PC.

Also, thanks for the kind words about the post. As LoboUDL said, it's basically what he was saying, just much more long-winded. It is just my speculation on the matter, but it makes sense to me from a business standpoint that the effects simply aren't included because it would be too difficult or time consuming to balance the rest of the visual performance for very little gain.

E.Nygma
18th Aug 2009, 20:26
I haven't tried the PC demo, even though I heard of it, so I don't know how much difference the PhysX enhancement makes. However, I should assume the difference isn't much noticeable?

Inzane
18th Aug 2009, 20:30
I haven't tried the PC demo, even though I heard of it, so I don't know how much difference the PhysX enhancement makes. However, I should assume the difference isn't much noticeable?

It is noticeable. punching through walls, smashing tiles.

Strife2k7
18th Aug 2009, 20:31
You can search youtube for 'batman physx comparison' and there's a video. Honestly, it isn't a huge difference but it does add a lot of little details.

E.Nygma
18th Aug 2009, 20:48
You can search youtube for 'batman physx comparison' and there's a video. Honestly, it isn't a huge difference but it does add a lot of little details.

Geeze, I followed your advice and I just made a youtube search with those keywords. Now I disagree with you!! Ok, remove the smoke, and remove the breakable tiles. Who cares about those anyway??
......But they couldn't even keep the moving pieces of papers, or the moving cloth banners????? Sheesh!
I don't know much of programming, but I have to say that to my untrained eyes, when seeing the comparison, I can only think "Oh come on, I can't believe you -had- to remove ALL of that".

Strife2k7
18th Aug 2009, 20:52
You'd never believe how much processing power a few billowing pieces of rippable cloth can eat up on a system. My PC for example goes from about 30fps at 1280x720 running the demo without PhysX but with everything else <except for antialiasing> maxed to between 3 and 5 fps running with it on.

Also, there's another comparison vid you can watch for Mirror's Edge that also highlights some of the differences. PhysX really takes advantage of additional hardware and processing power, but consoles just can't match what PC gamers have running multiple video processors with hundreds <or thousands> of mb of independant memory.

E.Nygma
18th Aug 2009, 20:57
You'd never believe how much processing power a few billowing pieces of rippable cloth can eat up on a system. My PC for example goes from about 30fps at 1280x720 running the demo without PhysX but with everything else <except for antialiasing> maxed to between 3 and 5 fps running with it on.



I don't know....
I'll trust your word and believe that they had a good technical (and not merely commercial) reasons to remove all of those details from the console versions.
But somehow, a bit of smoke and moving pieces of paper don't look to me as something so complicated that the PS3 can't handle it. They could have kept something, at last. I know I probably won't even notice such details while I am playing, but it's the fact that I keep not being able to understand why the PS3 version couldn't afford the little extra eyecandy, too. Grumble grumble.

Inzane
18th Aug 2009, 21:25
I am a little ticked off with Nvidia. Physx is overrated. closed standard that has ruined many game launches. And has broken many many games, needless to say I am nervous about the delay to put Physx in. I would prefer they did not do it. We will see countless posts in the future about problems with lag, drivers, etc. Its coming, I have seen this happen 6 times already.
To the Devs, you guys need to have a backup plan in place. A version without the Physx. and for petes sake test the dam installer before you guys send it to be duped. Grin made that fatal mistake.

lostsomething
18th Aug 2009, 21:40
There's a difference between "supports PhysX" and "Can do PhysX for free". Increasing the amount of physics calculations you're throwing at the game increases the workload. It's a pretty significant performance hit on modern pcs so I'd think the chances the console versions, already running at 30 fps, could pull them off are essentially zero.


......But they couldn't even keep the moving pieces of papers, or the moving cloth banners????? Sheesh!
I don't know much of programming, but I have to say that to my untrained eyes, when seeing the comparison, I can only think "Oh come on, I can't believe you -had- to remove ALL of that".

It's not just moving, it's reacting. One of the neat things you could do in Mirror's Edge was shoot a cloth banner to pieces and see it react appropriately to the deformations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFio7wMTQ2k


I am a little ticked off with Nvidia. Physx is overrated. closed standard that has ruined many game launches. And has broken many many games, needless to say I am nervous about the delay to put Physx in. I would prefer they did not do it. We will see countless posts in the future about problems with lag, drivers, etc. Its coming, I have seen this happen 6 times already.
To the Devs, you guys need to have a backup plan in place. A version without the Physx. and for petes sake test the dam installer before you guys send it to be duped. Grin made that fatal mistake.

It's already in most every UT3-engine based game out there. If we want to be technical the game's using PhysX even when it's "not", turning it "on" is just switching the work from your cpu to your gpu and increasing the workloads.

Argel319
18th Aug 2009, 21:47
I don't care that much about more PhysX, if all it really does is adding some fog and make the walls as easy to break as if they were made of papier-mache....?


I really liked the breakable tiles when Batman glide kicked Zsasz, that's the only PhysX thing I want on the PS3. The papers are nice, but they don't do anything but rustle.

Inzane
18th Aug 2009, 21:49
the physx used in unreal3 are ageia physx. they should have never ever sold to nivida. but if Nvidia was smart they would market a standalone physx card for those who are ATI users..nope they rather force you to buy their graphix cards.

lostsomething
18th Aug 2009, 21:57
the physx used in unreal3 are ageia physx. they should have never ever sold to nivida. but if Nvidia was smart they would market a standalone physx card for those who are ATI users..nope they rather force you to buy their graphix cards.

I'm pretty sure Ageia's business strategy was to get bought out from the very beginning.

Oh well, look at it this way. The moment an OpenCL or DX-Compute version of Havok looks imminent nVidia will open up PhysX.

Strife2k7
18th Aug 2009, 22:35
Well, the implication here is that some of these effects were in the game and were removed. I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. They were added to the PC version, not taken away from the consoles. I honestly can't tell you why for certain, as I'm not on Rocksteady's development team. What I can say is that adding more details, especially physics based details like those eats up more processing power and more memory. PCs have that to spare, consoles have a set amount. The trick is to maximize your usage of the console's available assets while keeping the game as close to it's own technical peak as you can.

Go back and look at Epic's work, the difference between Gears 1 and Gears 2, for instance. That's a single console release, releasing it on PS3 would take additional work to learn the quirks of the system. Given what I've seen of the game, I'm highly impressed with Rocksteady's efforts on all 3 versions of the game. That isn't to say that they /won't/ improve if there's a sequel. Game development seems to be just like anything else, the more practice you get, the better the end result will be. So, will we look back on this game and compare it to Batman 2 <should that occur, and I hope it does> and say 'Hey, look at how much better B2 looks than AA did'? Maybe so, maybe not. But I urge all of you not to jump on them for not adding these effects to the console versions. Having the extra memory and processing power of PC graphics cards surely makes it much easier.