physics accelerator card sounds good, but...

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

What kind of support is it going to have? It sounds like 3DFX already.
You really need some kind of industry standard like Direct-X has. Why
hasn't Microsoft worked on DirectPhysics?

A PCI or PCI-Express physics accelerator card could really go a long ways
to improving performance and making upgrades simpler, especially for some
games such as simulations, which are often CPU limited and run slower even
on a high end PC.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

A dedicated physics API and hardware accelerator isn't a bad idea, but
it's extreme fringe hardware. Right up there with flightsticks. And for
the same crowd.
The only ones who'd be inclined to buy it, and have use for it, would
be flight-sim fans (provided there still are any, and provided
realistic flight sims haven't been outlawed as tools of terrorism after
9/11).

Mainstream PC games wont use it, because console games can't.

 

[hank]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Mainstream PC games wont use it, because console games can't."

What a load of bollocks. If it turns out having a physic's accelerator
is almost mandatory on a PC then consoles wont be far behind.

I think, if marketed right and enough games start to use the technology
then its going to take off big time. Just look at what 3DFX did to the
graphics card market. Im hoping this physics card does the same thing,
revolutionizes the games scene again and kicks of another leap in
realism.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

They'll use physics accelerators in action games, too, of course. Most
action games now days are leaning towards having more involved physics.
Ragdoll physics, cloth simulation. Accelerator cards will allow simulations
of things like flowing water or lava, much more detailed ragdoll type
effects and maybe actual musculature on characters, much more detailed
explosions, etc.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "Hank" <admin@cellsounds.co.nz> Spake Unto All:

>"Mainstream PC games wont use it, because console games can't."
>
>What a load of bollocks. If it turns out having a physic's accelerator
>is almost mandatory on a PC then consoles wont be far behind.

They'll if so be 5 years behind.
Because that's how long a console generation is, and we're having a
generation change this year. There IS NO advance in console technology
except at generation change - that's the flipside to the "don't need
to upgrade every year" feature.

But I don't think they'd be even 5 years behind. They'd not use it at
all. The kinds of games console gamers want don't need or even benefit
from physics accelerators, or at least not enough to warrant the lower
profitability of the units.