64 replies to this topic

[Xen0sys]

If done right, the destructable environments will add a whole new dynamic ultimately enhancing gameplay. Looking forward to it.

An under $100 card should be fine to play Haken on good settings with advanced physics enabled. A 550 ti for instance. CPU, disk storage, and RAM all play a role also.

[Beefsweat]

YellerBill, on March 23 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

Maaaaaan I don't wanna have to get a new graphics card when my current one works so well. Does Nvidia Physx work on other graphics cards_ (I literally know nothing about Physx other than it's a physics engine thing that Nvidia made or something like that...)

Physx was not developed by Nvidia, it was developed by Ageia and acquired by Nvidia. Physx can be supported/accelerated by CPU or a CUDA-enabled nvidia GPU. For example, I have an AMD/ATI processor and graphics setup with no dedicated physx card, as such I can only run CPU-accelerated physx with no apex fx at a pretty hefty toll to my framereate. GPU acceleration will pretty much always beat CPU acceleration.

[YellerBill]

Beefsweat, on March 23 2013 - 09:06 PM, said:

YellerBill, on March 23 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

Maaaaaan I don't wanna have to get a new graphics card when my current one works so well. Does Nvidia Physx work on other graphics cards_ (I literally know nothing about Physx other than it's a physics engine thing that Nvidia made or something like that...)

Physx was not developed by Nvidia, it was developed by Ageia and acquired by Nvidia. Physx can be supported/accelerated by CPU or a CUDA-enabled nvidia GPU. For example, I have an AMD/ATI processor and graphics setup with no dedicated physx card, as such I can only run CPU-accelerated physx with no apex fx at a pretty hefty toll to my framereate. GPU acceleration will pretty much always beat CPU acceleration.

So basically physx works for everything, only on Nvidia cards it runs better_

[Beefsweat]

YellerBill, on March 23 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

Beefsweat, on March 23 2013 - 09:06 PM, said:

YellerBill, on March 23 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

Maaaaaan I don't wanna have to get a new graphics card when my current one works so well. Does Nvidia Physx work on other graphics cards_ (I literally know nothing about Physx other than it's a physics engine thing that Nvidia made or something like that...)

Physx was not developed by Nvidia, it was developed by Ageia and acquired by Nvidia. Physx can be supported/accelerated by CPU or a CUDA-enabled nvidia GPU. For example, I have an AMD/ATI processor and graphics setup with no dedicated physx card, as such I can only run CPU-accelerated physx with no apex fx at a pretty hefty toll to my framereate. GPU acceleration will pretty much always beat CPU acceleration.

So basically physx works for everything, only on Nvidia cards it runs better_

If you've got no nvidia card, your CPU may be able to carry that extra physx load, but unless you have a very powerful processor it's more advantageous to get an nvidia card or a dedicated physx card. (I have heard varying success stories with 'dedicated cards')

[Coot]

rent were you going full fuzzy bunny like everyone else hoping to get a free Titan_ lol

[Xen0sys]

I think a Titan is too OP for even Hawken unless they really ramp it up. I'm honestly playing maxed out on a stock 660 ti without any issues. Not using an SSD, and only have a 2.4Ghz x3 Phenom.

[Akaon]

They finally fixed getting stuck on terrain: you can shoot it now.

I'll be ignoring mechs and getting my revenge on all the terrain that has wronged me in the past .

[FussyBadger]

Here's to hoping that that the Physx part of it is just for higher graphic fidelity and realism versus being required to actually allow the map to function. While it may be easy to upgrade a video card on a desktop system, I game on a way-too-large Dell Precision laptop.

[Saturnine]

I'm kinda wondering whether this is simply a tech demo of what is possible with physx at it's current level. Implementing this in a game where you can't guarantee everyone has an incredible rig could potentially be problematic. For the players who can only play at low or medium (or hell, even high or ultra, but physx brings their computer to it's knees), how would a destructive environment be implemented on their end_ I suppose the easy answer is that the destruction would be simplified; holes of specific sizes appear in the midst of explosions or less high fidelity clouds of dust.. or just appear, at the extremely low end, I suppose, and then they can be interacted with at the appropriate level of fidelity, and the physx people just get extra baubles to look at, with more ragged/realistic edges on holes.

I was kinda taken off guard by this, because destructible environments is a feature that people have been asking after for a while, however, I recall a conversation somewhere with some dev (sorry! I honestly don't remember which dev, where, or when this conversation took place - it was a long time ago. ) saying that while destructible environments were something they wanted too, the major roadblock was in implementing it for the low end users as well. Or maybe I'm making this all up based on a bunch of different conversations with a bunch of different people and this is all a false memory. Regardless, it seems like it could be a valid stumbling block to me, though I guess there's nothing stopping them from implementing simple model deformations for the low end users on the surfaces that receive them, and have a resultant gameplay effect as a result. Red Faction managed it aaagggesss ago, so I suppose a similar thing could be implemented here, so long as it could be guaranteed the people were seeing the same thing, and aren't falling through holes only the server sees, or something like that.

[Commy1]

I have to wonder what kind of card could run Hawken as smoothly as they showed. It looks fantastic, have  a feeling it'll be some 5k rig or something quad sli 690's (does hawken support sli_). If I could get those results with SLi 660's then I'll order another one right now.

Edited by Commy1, March 24 2013 - 06:48 AM.

[hendman]

Woohoo this is awesome, i get to blow up walls! Who cares i get stuck on walls, floors and other mechs, that i can't find a game to play because of the ranking system, that the only mechs viable use burst damage, that fps drops rapidly, that i have only a couple maps to play on, and that while playing this close combat mech game i get blown up in a couple of seconds by mechs i can't even see or retaliate on.

Keep up the good work, funnel more resources into graphic options that nobody will be able to see because physx cripples the fps even more.

Edited by hendman, March 24 2013 - 06:58 AM.

[Cpt_Kill_Jack]

Ok a few things. Im betting because that is a system that Nvidia most likely provided it has at least one TItan GPU in it. Also Thats a new map. The other thing I have a feeling that Paul is the new producer that wrote the last producer letter for the Raider update. A Mr. PabloPwnage. Come on someone tell me im right on that last point.

[Xen0sys]

Saturnine, on March 24 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

I'm kinda wondering whether this is simply a tech demo of what is possible with physx at it's current level. Implementing this in a game where you can't guarantee everyone has an incredible rig could potentially be problematic. For the players who can only play at low or medium (or hell, even high or ultra, but physx brings their computer to it's knees), how would a destructive environment be implemented on their end_ I suppose the easy answer is that the destruction would be simplified; holes of specific sizes appear in the midst of explosions or less high fidelity clouds of dust.. or just appear, at the extremely low end, I suppose, and then they can be interacted with at the appropriate level of fidelity, and the physx people just get extra baubles to look at, with more ragged/realistic edges on holes.

I was kinda taken off guard by this, because destructible environments is a feature that people have been asking after for a while, however, I recall a conversation somewhere with some dev (sorry! I honestly don't remember which dev, where, or when this conversation took place - it was a long time ago. ) saying that while destructible environments were something they wanted too, the major roadblock was in implementing it for the low end users as well. Or maybe I'm making this all up based on a bunch of different conversations with a bunch of different people and this is all a false memory. Regardless, it seems like it could be a valid stumbling block to me, though I guess there's nothing stopping them from implementing simple model deformations for the low end users on the surfaces that receive them, and have a resultant gameplay effect as a result. Red Faction managed it aaagggesss ago, so I suppose a similar thing could be implemented here, so long as it could be guaranteed the people were seeing the same thing, and aren't falling through holes only the server sees, or something like that.

You don't need an incredible rig at all. You're right - destruction would be simplified.

FussyBadger, on March 24 2013 - 05:24 AM, said:

Here's to hoping that that the Physx part of it is just for higher graphic fidelity and realism versus being required to actually allow the map to function. While it may be easy to upgrade a video card on a desktop system, I game on a way-too-large Dell Precision laptop.

It will be for everyone and it doesn't have to be hugely draining on the system. Also how often are you gaming somewhere that you just recently had to move to_ Get a desktop set up to make the most use of your money.

Commy1, on March 24 2013 - 06:47 AM, said:

I have to wonder what kind of card could run Hawken as smoothly as they showed. It looks fantastic, have  a feeling it'll be some 5k rig or something quad sli 690's (does hawken support sli_). If I could get those results with SLi 660's then I'll order another one right now.

My 660 ti SC runs it max no problems. An under 1k rig will do the job. Get an SSD and a good CPU + at least a 660 ti and you'll be in great shape. SLI 660's will perform about 30% less than the 690 which performs about 2-2.5x a single 660 (basing this on numerous benchmarks I've looked at). Nearly every game supports SLI - the question is whether it is optimized for it or not, which I do not know. I'm sure there are some SLI'ers here though.

hendman, on March 24 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

Woohoo this is awesome, i get to blow up walls! Who cares i get stuck on walls, floors and other mechs, that i can't find a game to play because of the ranking system, that the only mechs viable use burst damage, that fps drops rapidly, that i have only a couple maps to play on, and that while playing this close combat mech game i get blown up in a couple of seconds by mechs i can't even see or retaliate on.

Keep up the good work, funnel more resources into graphic options that nobody will be able to see because physx cripples the fps even more.

Physx doesn't have to cripple anything. You can opt to not use it's advanced processing while still receiving the server info regarding broken walls. If a rock flies with beautiful physics from a recently blown up wall and lands somewhere all the while having no impact on anything - it wouldn't matter if it was accurately simulated or not. Much like how the game clients get information about other player locations from the server, the server could send out physics results to the clients - you just don't get to be immersed. This is somewhat speculative but I'm sure it's possible.

Edited by Xen0sys, March 24 2013 - 08:17 AM.

[HugeGuts]

Destructible environments would be a very interesting way to bring much needed balance to Hawken. So far, cover reliant classes are the most powerful because maps have so much of it. Take cover away, and the game tilts to open combat classes.

Matches would inititally favor cover reliant classes, but then the game dynamic would gradually shift to favor open combat classes. This could add some serious depth to Hawken.

[RedVan]

tman7919, on March 23 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

... I have an AMD card that doesn't do advanced physics...

No worries, if they ever put destructible environments in hawken, they can't make it specifically for nvidia.  It may look prettier on nvidia, but they'd make it pretty enough for those of us who like to spend less $$ per unit performance

[FussyBadger]

Xen0sys, on March 24 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

It will be for everyone and it doesn't have to be hugely draining on the system. Also how often are you gaming somewhere that you just recently had to move to_ Get a desktop set up to make the most use of your money.

Your comment doesn't make sense. It seems like you're suggesting someone buys a laptop because it's convenient when relocating their home_ I hope I'm reading that wrong. Anyways - I already own the laptop. Dropping around a grand on a desktop would be a terrible use of my money.

[Xuande]

Wow, those few seconds just gave me hope for the future.

Can't wait for this!!

[Xen0sys]

FussyBadger, on March 24 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

Xen0sys, on March 24 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

It will be for everyone and it doesn't have to be hugely draining on the system. Also how often are you gaming somewhere that you just recently had to move to_ Get a desktop set up to make the most use of your money.

Your comment doesn't make sense. It seems like you're suggesting someone buys a laptop because it's convenient when relocating their home_ I hope I'm reading that wrong. Anyways - I already own the laptop. Dropping around a grand on a desktop would be a terrible use of my money.

I didn't mean move as in re-locate permanent dwelling areas. I meant move as in pick up the laptop/mouse/whatever and go somewhere else to use it.

$ per $, you get more performance in a desktop than a laptop period. ie, whatever money went into your laptop, it would have gone slightly further in a desktop.

The point I was making is about the value of having a mobile PC yes. To re-iterate: A desktop stays in one place and is harder to move around but how often does one (you) need to move around their gaming rig in order to play_ Are you really utilizing that function to it's fullest or might you have been okay with a stationary set up with more performance_

If it's about going to and from school or a friends house on the regular then okay but if not, it wasn't a great choice to invest in for gaming purposes.

Edited by Xen0sys, March 24 2013 - 04:58 PM.

[RedVan]

Xen0sys, on March 24 2013 - 04:34 PM, said:

FussyBadger, on March 24 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

Xen0sys, on March 24 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

It will be for everyone and it doesn't have to be hugely draining on the system. Also how often are you gaming somewhere that you just recently had to move to_ Get a desktop set up to make the most use of your money.

Your comment doesn't make sense. It seems like you're suggesting someone buys a laptop because it's convenient when relocating their home_ I hope I'm reading that wrong. Anyways - I already own the laptop. Dropping around a grand on a desktop would be a terrible use of my money.

$ per $, you get more performance in a desktop than a laptop period. ie, whatever money went into your laptop, it would have gone slightly further in a desktop.

The point I was making is about the value of having a mobile PC yes. To re-iterate: A desktop stays in one place and is harder to move around but how often does one (you) need to move around their gaming rig in order to play_ Are you really utilizing that function to it's fullest or might you have been okay with a stationary set up with more performance_

If it's about going to and from school or a friends house on the regular then okay but if not, it wasn't a great choice to invest in for gaming purposes.

TL:DR
Sell the laptop, get a desktop, drink alone.

[Guiotine]

hendman, on March 24 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

Woohoo this is awesome, i get to blow up walls! Who cares i get stuck on walls, floors and other mechs, that i can't find a game to play because of the ranking system, that the only mechs viable use burst damage, that fps drops rapidly, that i have only a couple maps to play on, and that while playing this close combat mech game i get blown up in a couple of seconds by mechs i can't even see or retaliate on.

Keep up the good work, funnel more resources into graphic options that nobody will be able to see because physx cripples the fps even more.

because they can only work on one project at once, and they only have one development team.