SOW update 2010-7-16 - Printable Version
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=274)
+--- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=331)
+--- Thread: SOW update 2010-7-16 (/showthread.php?tid=70872)
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=274)
+--- Forum: Cliffs of Dover (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=331)
+--- Thread: SOW update 2010-7-16 (/showthread.php?tid=70872)
Pages:
1
2
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - JAMF - 24.07.2010
Fireskull Wrote:Oleg did not specifically mention PhysX by name, but all the things that he did cover such as "superior 3D damage modeling will be included" (para-phrased because I don't remember the exact sentence), would have to include the PhysX capability, wouldn't you think?.No, that I'd doubt. IL-2 already had, as a foundation, a good damage model. Such a claim as "superior 3D damage modeling", when referred to IL2's implementation, could just point to the increase in the number of hit-boxes and increased complexity of "when X = damaged nn% then failure electrical/hydraulic/cooling component Y" logic programming. With the increased processing power and multi-core programming, these improvements shouldn't create a noticeable difference in frame rate.
Fireskull Wrote:Also, the water and the changing weather conditions seem to be a clear indication of PhysX technology.These changes are not instant but gradual, thus don't need a burst of processing power and can be tasked to a core that's not being taxed a 100%.
Fireskull Wrote:Oleg also spoke in online and in person interviews that there will be a big surprise with Storm of War that they will not publish until at least near release date. Could this be the latest 3D technology on the line of DreamWorks, like we see in the latest 3D movies in the theatre? I think that is plausible.The ridiculous thing in 3D is that 3D has been around in nVidia world since the previous century. (1999
) I have played the original IL-2 with 3D glasses (Elsa Revelator, IR type) and the excellent "Mobil 1 Rally Championship" from 2000. Back then you needed a decent monitor that could do a 100Hz at the resolution you wanted to play in and LCD technology was not up to the task and just wouldn't work. You have been able to grab a stereo driver from nVidia for 11-12 years now. (Archive only goes back 10 years) It's been integrated in some drivers and left out in others.I wish they would use PhysX for the effects it's been used for in the most high profile games up till now; "Mirror's Edge" and "Batman: Arkham Asylum". They showcased fog/smoke effects, cloth, glass shattering and such. Or finally use bombing explosions that look random, not multiple copies, and have a shower of particles dependent on soil or structure being hit. If done that way, ATI/AMD users would be able to use the game, but only miss out on some visuals. If OpenCL is used, it's another story.
Other things they could do with PhysX: AI improvements, real time ground war/campaign simulation, weather calculations (thermals/thunderclouds), collapsible buildings, realistic sinking of ships, calculations for the behavior of fragments and plane pieces after the moment of impact. I gotta stop, or I'll drool into the keyboard, just thinking of the possibilities.
I'll believe it when it's officially announced, not before. I hope you'll not hold that against me. :wink: 8)
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - Fireskull - 24.07.2010
Hi, JAMF
It's very interesting to think about it, huh?
What if the damage model does include the latest PhysX? Can we even imagine the randomization in the damage events? It would be awesome!
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - JAMF - 24.07.2010
Sure, one can dream. I even dream of someone using two of the now relatively cheap smartphone displays to create an affordable 3D HMD.
hock:
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - WhoDatNotSayin - 24.07.2010
Quote:Oleg did not specifically mention PhysX by name, but all the things that he did cover such as "superior 3D damage modeling will be included" (para-phrased because I don't remember the exact sentence), would have to include the PhysX capability, wouldn't you think?. Also, the water and the changing weather conditions seem to be a clear indication of PhysX technology.
Given that PhysX is a proprietary system, for SoW:BoB to be based around it would seem short-sighted and risky. Nothing Oleg has said suggests his "superior 3D damage modeling" etc will be based on anything other than good programming techniques utilising standard hardware. If you have any real evidence to suggest otherwise, please let us know.
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - WhoDatNotSayin - 24.07.2010
Quote:Can we even imagine the randomization in the damage events? It would be awesome!In an online gaming system, any 'randomisation' has to be transmitted to all users, using network technology. This means that the use of PhysX or anything like it for the purpose is probably pointless.
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - Fireskull - 25.07.2010
Ah! The amazing things that technology makes possible.
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - WhoDatNotSayin - 25.07.2010
Fireskull Wrote:Ah! The amazing things that technology makes possible.So, still no actual evidence that SoW is using PhysX, then?
In any networked game, attempting to use technology for 'randomisation' or anything similar that isn't available to all users is likely to result in bottlenecks, and/or inconsistencies in the presented game state. Oleg Maddox would have two choices - either (a) make the use of PhysX part of the spec for online play, or (b) not use it for anything other than cosmetic purposes. In a typical Console game, or even in a one off PC game, reliance on one particular proprietary type of hardware isn't particularly risky, but in a simulation which has been in development for a considerable time (before PhysX existed, actually), and with a potential lifetime of a decade, it would be a dubious commercial proposition. Why take the risk when Oleg has already demonstrated an ability to exploit standard hardware to the extent he has?
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - Fireskull - 25.07.2010
We'll see.
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - WhoDatNotSayin - 25.07.2010
Fireskull Wrote:We'll see.We will.
As to how long it take to 'see', that might take a considerable time, if Oleg has made the wrong decision. I've been around computers long enough to know that binding long-term commercial success onto hardware you don't own is risky. I suspect Oleg thinks the same way. I hope he does.
Re: SOW update 2010-7-16 - Lonestar - 26.07.2010
When I look at these pictures, I must remember my first flight simulator I have ever played, called "Spitfire 40"! The enemy aircraft was a white cross on green/blue background!