Posts I've Made
06.03.2013 @ 06:55
Guy N said:Well, no, it's not. You're constraining the designers by telling them they have to do that. It would be like telling Matisse he had to paint in acrylics. They can use whatever technology they believe will give them the results they want. In the current state of the art, there's not much other than either DirectX 11 or OpenGL 4 that can do what they want (and OpenGL 4 could do it better). But to dictate tools and technologies to engineers who have to work with them is just arrogant.
You're taking this too seriously. You think that just because I say,"Witcher 3 MUST be DX11," that it has some power to compel CDPR to use DX11 in the Witcher 3?
CDPR can heed or ignore my advice at their whim, as I have no power to make them do either. I could only hope they would read the thread and see that many of their customers desired DX11 in the Witcher 3.
I'm just like you and everybody else on this forum, a fan, that wants the Witcher 3 to be the absolute best game possible. The only reason I used the word "must" is because I was genuinely surprised that the Witcher 2 was DX9 only, and I didn't want another DX9 repeat for the Witcher 3.
In the end, the decision by CDPR was undoubtedly made for technical reasons, as DX9 just cannot deliver the goods necessary to make the Witcher 3 achieve it's goal.
Sure, they could use OpenGL but they probably have more expertise with DirectX...
06.03.2013 @ 05:33
Guy N said:But the use of any particular graphics technology to realize those graphics is an engineering decision, and for customers to attempt to impose their will by demanding any particular technology ("Witcher 3 MUST be DX11") is meaningless.
It's not meaningless in light of CDPR's desire to exceed the Witcher 2 on all fronts.
DX11 is absolutely necessary to realize their own artistic vision (no ifs ands or buts), and in the end, CDPR made their own decision....the correct one.
In reality though, they had no choice. DX9 could never take the Witcher 3 where they want it to go without sacrificing a lot of performance, graphical detail and contiguity.
05.03.2013 @ 06:11Check and mate
05.03.2013 @ 06:03
Aver said:No, Nvidia doesn't provide any support and Havok does.
I know this for a fact to be wrong. When Batman Arkham Asylum came out, the inclusion of hardware physx was a late addition that caused the game to be delayed. During that time, Nvidia sent out one of their own software engineers to help Rocksteady implement the effects.
PhysX is actually an important part of The Way It's Meant To Be Played Program, and we all know how active Nvidia has been in courting developers over the years..
QuoteMoreover PhysX documentation is only in Finnish language, because Aegia, original creator of PhysX was Finnish company and part of deal between them and Nvidia when Nvidia bought them, was agreement that Nvidia won't translate any documentation nor creation kit from Finnish. It's because Aegia was very patriotic company and they wanted to promote Finnish languge - I know idiotic, but it's the way it is :/ . So it's very hard for programmer to work with PhysX, but Nvidia provides help from their translators (so I guess we can say that they provide some support, but only basic).
I've never heard this before ever. I can't say for a fact that it's incorrect, but the weirdness I think speaks for itself.
QuoteAlso, if company want to use PhysX they have to sign agreement with Nvidia that source code of the game is property of Nvidia - it's necessary to check if some component wasn't used in improper way. So using PhysX is very shady business. That's why so few companies use it - most of them are afraid that they will lose control over their source code.
Again, you're the first person I've ever heard say this. If it were true, I think it would be much more notable, as thats a pretty ridiculous price to pay..
Also, PhysX isn't some obscure physics API. More games use PhysX than Havok (the software version). In fact, the Unreal Engine 3.0 has PhysX integrated into the engine itself, and look how many games use the UE3.
I'm sure the fact that it's free to use also has a lot to do with it's popularity.
04.03.2013 @ 19:42Excellent, excellent />
Nice to see CDPR took one of my considerations to heart. Actually, they took two since they will be using PhysX instead of Havok />
Prince_of_Nothing hasn't added any friends yet.