Cellfactor Tech Demo

The AGEIA Website (thanks Frans) offers downloads of a tech demo for Cellfactor, saying "This demo is multiplayer-enabled and playable offline with customizable bots." There are two prerequisites, however, as downloading the demo requires registration, and running it will require the AGEIA PhysX accelerator.
View : : :
27 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
27.
 
No subject
May 9, 2006, 00:27
Dev
27.
No subject May 9, 2006, 00:27
May 9, 2006, 00:27
Dev
 
StreetPreacher:
The price is going to be about $300, nowhere near $50 sorry.
See the link the other guy posted below.

This comment was edited on May 9, 00:29.
26.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 19:36
Enahs
 
26.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 19:36
May 8, 2006, 19:36
 Enahs
 
According to this article you could be farther away from the truth ...In fact Ageia has admitted it...heres link...

Uhh, no that article does not.
In fact the ARTICLE agrees with me. The benchmarks with the PPU gets lower performance then without it, and the author of the article theorizes the same reason as my catch-22.

Now, they do have a quote from Ageia saying it is a “driver” problem…but there are no benchmarks to prove that.

And in fact every other article that includes benchmark results all show the same thing and all draw the same conclusions. It runs slower because since it does more (with less CPU usage) so the video card has to draw and render more, lowering the frames per second.

But that is comparing apples to apple pie, it is not fair.

The only real thing would be for a game to have the same exact physics on the PPU and the CPU and compare those performance differences.


Did you know that a whole pound of yummy delicious ripe strawberries only has 146 calories,36g carbs, 9g fiber,3g protein,1g fat and 475% daily Vit.C? 1 Snickers bar has 280 calories,35g carbs,14g fat.Eat strawberries!
r{www.frappr.com/bluesnewsmembers
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Avatar 15513
25.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 18:45
25.
No subject May 8, 2006, 18:45
May 8, 2006, 18:45
 
I'm very "meh" about the whole physics add-on card thing. I just don't see it making that much of a difference in gameplay or the general experience. I'm not convinced that I'll ever need one at all, but if I did I definately wouldn't spend over $50. I'd rather spend it on a new graphics card, which I KNOW will make a noticeable difference in the experience.

Personally I think physics cards will be viewed as a market flop when nobody makes them 5 years from now. They have yet to demonstrate any real cost/benefit to consumers.

24.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 18:30
PHJF
 
24.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 18:30
May 8, 2006, 18:30
 PHJF
 
The only games that really use physics at all are shooters, and it is just stupid to invest so much into it when games are as linear as they are. Blowing up a pile of garbage is not going to have any effect on the game one way or the other. Advanced physics would only make sense in a game like The Elder Scrolls.

Plus this is just adding a whole lot of load to developers. The Half-Life 2 physics puzzles were a perfect example, as they did nothing to add to the game, but it made old Gabe do more fruitless work.

But man, now I feel like playing Red Faction...

------
"I have a grave announcement. Anyone with a weak heart had better leave now. Goodbye."
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Avatar 17251
23.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 18:26
23.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 18:26
May 8, 2006, 18:26
 
"It is the catch-22.
It takes load of the CPU so it can have much more things to do physics on (and more advanced physics) but that means the video card has to display much more and in return reducing performance."


According to this article you could be farther away from the truth ...In fact Ageia has admitted it...heres link...

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=244



Peace

22.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 17:26
22.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 17:26
May 8, 2006, 17:26
 
I might be confused with what the PPU's are going to offer but this is my hope:

Havok, physX and the physics we see in games now is a few objects operating under those conditions. Garbage cans flying around, dumpsters being blown sideways etc. Remember all those hallways in HL2? What if all that was destructable? What if with enough bullets you could make your own damn door! A PPU makes it possible to build materials into a game that the player can manipulate or destroy. So those same hallways in HL2 can now be easily knocked down and blown wide open without needing to program it in.

What we see today is examples of how physics improves a game, with a PPU a game can be designed with physics from the ground up, so the ground can react, and every structure is "built" and needs to stand up to the laws of physics. To put it simply, what goes up must come down, if you destroy the supports of a building it will come crashing down. If you fire a rocket into a pile of garbage, the objects that make up that little pile get blown all over the place and poof, no more pile...

That's my expectations for physics cards anyway, and I'm hoping we'll see some more games like cell factor to be excited about.

They should make a tech demo of that matrix shoot out in the building lobby. That would kick ass.

21.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 17:17
21.
No subject May 8, 2006, 17:17
May 8, 2006, 17:17
 
On BFG's site it says that their PhysX cards will be available tomorrow (the 9th). ASUS doesn't seem to be saying anything about it yet, unless I missed it.

20.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 17:11
Enahs
 
20.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 17:11
May 8, 2006, 17:11
 Enahs
 
Currently it isn't even improving performance by taking the load off the CPU, matter of fact GRAW is getting 10-15 FPS less when the PPU kicks in.

It is the catch-22.
It takes load of the CPU so it can have much more things to do physics on (and more advanced physics) but that means the video card has to display much more and in return reducing performance.


Did you know that a whole pound of yummy delicious ripe strawberries only has 146 calories,36g carbs, 9g fiber,3g protein,1g fat and 475% daily Vit.C? 1 Snickers bar has 280 calories,35g carbs,14g fat.Eat strawberries!
r{www.frappr.com/bluesnewsmembers
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Avatar 15513
19.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 17:02
19.
No subject May 8, 2006, 17:02
May 8, 2006, 17:02
 
another thing that just came to mind when comparing a GPU vs PPU is that accelerated graphics benefits EVERY single 3D game no matter the genre and environment. How many games require full blown physics simulation to make it enjoyable? The ones that do are using a software solution like Havok to excellent effect. Currently it isn't even improving performance by taking the load off the CPU, matter of fact GRAW is getting 10-15 FPS less when the PPU kicks in.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Blues Nazi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Avatar 10137
18.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 14:48
18.
No subject May 8, 2006, 14:48
May 8, 2006, 14:48
 
And oh yes, another think I failed to mention, but Hump did: the stuff that's in games now can be done by your CPU apparantly anyway. :s

Chicken and the egg situation...

17.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 14:44
17.
No subject May 8, 2006, 14:44
May 8, 2006, 14:44
 
Sorry to say this but if you buy such a card at this moment you're a fool for so many reasons.

It's my understanding that they need to charge this much to offset their free SDK costs and because, apparantly, it's overpowered. I don't know if that's smart though.

Also, please don't be fooled by games such as GRAW, there's a big stink about how much the AGEIA engine actually does (not much it seems) and there's the whole Havok pissing contest.

Fact is, you're better off not having such a card at the moment than you are having it (case in point: GRAW).

I'm not at all against more and better physics, but a dedicated PPU at such a ludicrous price... I dunno.

Maybe it would be better to have this as a DirectX component. Come to think of it, I don't really know how Creative's SDK works. If a game supports more advanced audio effects it's always EAX but then I don't think it's free (is it?).

I really hope we see some more attention for physics and audio in the future.

16.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 14:34
16.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 14:34
May 8, 2006, 14:34
 
I don't think it's so crazy an idea... When 3D cards came out you had to buy an additional card to your video card and even 2 in some cases if you wanted the maximum effect.

yes but does the physX card really have the emotional impact that the 3d accelerator had? IMO it doesn't, but thats just me.

the other issue is I just played this demo in the editor (it won't let you join a regular game because it doesn't detect the card) and while i didn't have all the bells and whistles on it acted just as it did in the gameplay movie that got everyone excited. the "magnetic grenade" can be used and it acts on objects exactly like it did in the movie. Given that why would anyone rush out to buy one of these when software can do the job as long as you have a moderately powerful rig?

Perhaps in another 18 months when it has more support from developers it may deserve another look but at this price, thats not a given.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Blues Nazi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Avatar 10137
15.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 13:32
15.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 13:32
May 8, 2006, 13:32
 
Wow, that is the first place I've seen that has it instock. Wonder if it really is 199 and they are charging more because no one else has it.

I am tempted to buy it but can't just throw out 300 dollars right now...

I haven't a clue about marketing but for this company to try to create an entirely new hardware niche while charging the same amount as a moderately high-end graphics card is moronic.

I don't think it's so crazy an idea... When 3D cards came out you had to buy an additional card to your video card and even 2 in some cases if you wanted the maximum effect.

I think the software is going to make or break this technology. I remember seeing mechwarrior 2 with a 3D accelerator card and that sold me, this Cell Factor game almost has me sold. I'm looking forward to seeing some other games using this card from E3.
This comment was edited on May 8, 14:18.
14.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 12:38
14.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 12:38
May 8, 2006, 12:38
 
no, $199

uh, no, $299

http://www.tankguys.biz/physx-128mb-physics-card-p-1602.html

I haven't a clue about marketing but for this company to try to create an entirely new hardware niche while charging the same amount as a moderately high-end graphics card is moronic. People care more selecting a sound card than they would a dedicated PSU and a very good sound card can be had for under $80. Even though it's use at the moment is negligible, I think most hard core PC gamers would grab one if the price point was $100 or less.

The only way they'll succeed is if motherboard manufacturers add an on-board PSU as a gimmie.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Blues Nazi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."

- Jim Goad
Avatar 10137
13.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 11:49
War
13.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 11:49
May 8, 2006, 11:49
War
 
hope that physics becomes as common as 3D acceleration and a Direct X api, not someone proprietary to each and every game.
Don't you know that if it is Micro$uxxx, it is always proprietary no-matter-what?
Damn Microsoft fanboys... always trying to one-up me! But there can only be one Microsoft plant per forum!!

12.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 11:41
12.
No subject May 8, 2006, 11:41
May 8, 2006, 11:41
 
I never buy into first generation gizmos, always too expensive and just a test bed to see how they sell.

ALso I am worried about "Works only with Aegeia" or "Works only with Havok!" just like the early days of video acceleration wars between Voodoo and Matrox as well as the audio wars of Adlib and Creative.

Just sit it out and wait to see what happens. I hope that physics becomes as common as 3D acceleration and a Direct X api, not someone proprietary to each and every game. That system never works.

11.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 11:21
11.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 11:21
May 8, 2006, 11:21
 
Just booted up the demo without the card installed and was pleasantly surprised. I tryed it for 5 min and it was running in the editor window'd but it ran great! Not much to do besides push can's and barrels around but that in itself is impressive. Holding down the space bar has a building push effect like a wave moving away from you, it's really cool knocking tons of stuff off the edge.

Many effects are disabled but the fact that it ran pretty well window'd and looked very good makes me very happy.

I think I'll be picking up one of these cards. Does anyone know how to make the debugging mode go full screen and drop all those lines and markers?

Lucasarts needs to make a Jedi game based around the physics stuff in this game, this is really frickin cool.

This comment was edited on May 8, 11:23.
10.
 
No subject
May 8, 2006, 10:51
10.
No subject May 8, 2006, 10:51
May 8, 2006, 10:51
 
Thats what never quite added up for me. Yes the card will be doing all the hard calculations, but ultimately, the graphics card will still have to render tons more stuff.

9.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 10:46
9.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 10:46
May 8, 2006, 10:46
 
Oh, my mistake. But yeah, still expensive.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
GO SENS GO!
GO HABS GO!
Parallax Abstraction
Twitch | YouTube | Podcast
Avatar 13614
8.
 
Re: No subject
May 8, 2006, 10:35
8.
Re: No subject May 8, 2006, 10:35
May 8, 2006, 10:35
 
no, $199.

Doesn't make it anyless better since it's still 200 bucks just to get some good physics.

27 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older