Post by: ThePerm on June 06, 2005, 10:13:39 PM
pc and CONSOLE report? which console hads one of these.....
they use the word revolutionary alot.
Post by: Truthliesn1seyes on June 06, 2005, 11:44:42 PM
Post by: HereticPB on June 06, 2005, 11:58:19 PM
Post by: Truthliesn1seyes on June 07, 2005, 12:42:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: HereticPB
One guy worked at Metroworks (Code Warrior programming software) with some slight ties with Nintendo. Also somebody from Sega and somebody from 3DFX.
What do you mean by this?
Post by: nemo_83 on June 07, 2005, 01:05:21 AM
I like how they specifically point out hair effects. Also the dynamics and collision detection remind me of haptic controllers.
This can't be for 360, and Sony is investing in CELL. It could only be Nintendo. They want to make things easier for developers. A PPU takes a lot off of the shoulders of the GPU and CPU.
Post by: MrMojoRising on June 07, 2005, 01:17:25 AM
Stay Tuned"
Unless they want us to stay tuned until the generation after PS3, Xbox 360, and Rev, then Revolution probably does have their PPU. Unless sony or microsoft have this up their sleeves still...which I doubt.
Post by: Dasmos on June 07, 2005, 01:26:33 AM
But i agree I think out of all the upcoming consoles, the REV is the most probable place for it's home........or place of residence.
Post by: jasonditz on June 07, 2005, 07:21:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dasmos
I don't think the "triangle" has anything to do with "triforce"..........
But i agree I think out of all the upcoming consoles, the REV is the most probable place for it's home........or place of residence.
Unless, of course, Nokia is going to announce plans for a giant cordless phone that hooks up to your TV for a viewscreen and also has a DVD drive hidden behind the battery.
Post by: pudu on June 07, 2005, 07:40:50 AM
Quote
A powerful API for the PhysX PPU, NovodeX enables game developers to inject both software-only and hardware-accelerated features into their games.
This was said under "NovodeX Physics SDK" and talks about the Software Developer's Kit. I believe they basically are saying that it allows developers utilize their physics engine with (hardware-accelerated) or without (software-only) their PhysX PPU.
I don't see Nintendo utilizing one of these this next generation but if they did it would certainly be something to make up for if they use a gernally less powerful CPU setup. By letting a PPU do physics their cpu's would be less tied up and, therefor, even if they have less powerful CPUs they may be able to do more then the compitition in physics-heavy games.
This is however new technology. These PPUs haven't had a chance to become more of a standard or develope different PPUs between companies for competition so pricing would be rather high. The only way I see Nintendo getting one in Revolution is if they sell them PPUs for as cheap as possible and a slightly cut down versioin. AGEIAs benifit from this is getting a large platform to prove what their PPU could do. Or, in other words, the PPU would be to Nintendo as the Blu-Ray would be to Sony. This would be huge.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 07, 2005, 08:13:37 AM
Well, that's because hair and cloth simulation is one of the most common physics problems in games. Many games don't have any freely moving objects, e.g. Soul Calibur 2 has only two actors in the game, neither of which uses complex physics but their hair and clothes are simulated by a physics engine to some degree.
Sony has the Cell so they probably don't need a PPU. After all, there's not much else for the Cell to do except for physics.
pudu: Novodex is a physics engine. Someone wants physics in their game, they license Novodex (I think Epic does that now). Novodex now includes PPU support so if one is present it will use that. It was developed before the PPU was.
I doubt the PPU is that expensive, there is little demand for it since the CPU does a more than adequate job in most situations so they will have to price it aggressively for people to consider the extra expenses for such little benefit.
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 07, 2005, 08:25:50 AM
By creating a motherboard with 3 cards they could do much more with much less...and just because this come is claiming to be the first multi-processing PPU, doesn't mean other companies aren't working on it.
Nintendo could have their current company they are working with design a similar chip. This would be cheaper for Nintendo, and more importantly it would mean all the chips in the Revolution would mesh better because all 3 were custom-made for eachother.
Then all you have to do is put the optimal RAM to have the unit create great games (But you wouldn't have to put too much.) And then you have a system that may seem less powerful, but works perfectly together.
Throw in some Emulation software, a nifty controller, and a 10-25 free game download card and you have a perfect REVOLUTION.
Post by: Djunknown on June 07, 2005, 10:56:36 AM
I won't deny that PPU's won't blow up in the future, but the technology is too new to be massively implemented.. But if Nintendo springs this up, I'll gladly shut my mouth.
Post by: pudu on June 07, 2005, 11:59:45 AM
Quote
pudu: Novodex is a physics engine. Someone wants physics in their game, they license Novodex (I think Epic does that now). Novodex now includes PPU support so if one is present it will use that. It was developed before the PPU was.
I doubt the PPU is that expensive, there is little demand for it since the CPU does a more than adequate job in most situations so they will have to price it aggressively for people to consider the extra expenses for such little benefit.
I know Novodex is the physics engine. My point was the only place that they mention console support is under their Novedex description and specs, which is by no means a hint that a console has actually signed on to use the actual PhysX PPU card. Current consoles could support the engine so this basically says nothing to point to Nintendo using one of their PPUs this coming generation.
Also: pricing. The pricing, as with any new peice of technology, is going to be high:
Quote
The cards based on the new AGEIA PhysX processor will start sampling in Q3 2005, and when they appear in retail in Q4 their price is supposed to be between $249 and $299, according to X-bit labs report from E3 show in Los Angeles, California.
A link to that article can be found >>HERE<<
I know people will argue that since the Rev. is suspected to be released near the end of next year it still may get a PPU because prices would drop. Personally I highly doubt it will...atleast not an AGEIA one. If Nintendo was smart enough to develope their own (even if it's less advanced to cut costs) more power to them!
Post by: Ian Sane on June 07, 2005, 12:05:59 PM
The same reason they didn't reveal the controller or the specs for the Rev at E3? Nintendo might consider something like this as a significant advantage and thus worth keeping quiet for fear of being stolen. That's not proof that they are using a PPU but it's a logical explanation for why they wouldn't annouce their partnership with Ageia if they are.
Post by: HereticPB on June 07, 2005, 12:45:33 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on June 07, 2005, 12:49:03 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 07, 2005, 12:54:37 PM
They are trying to sell companies on the idea of the chip.
I would not be surprised if Nintendo released the Revolution with this kind of chip. Be it from this company or even the companies they are already partnered with. Just because we know 2 of the chips being created for the Revolution doesn't mean we know all the chips.
I would say that if Nintendo goes in this direction I would be happy, and they could do a cool motherboard lay out of triangle for the chips and call it the Tri-force chip set.
Post by: ThePerm on June 07, 2005, 01:41:03 PM
also, another thing...i remember miyamoto saying things in the vein when wind waker came out that he was very dissapointed how devlopers were moe focusing on the graphics side of realism rather then realism as in motion. Wind waker has some very very good motion. Maybe perhaps they were looking for a solution like a ppu. i'm betting nintendo has to take extra time to make the mother board because of all the chips their putting on. I heard theres a sound processor too. Iwata said somewhere i beleve that he was less concerned about making an ultra powerful beast processor andm roe concerned about having important functions. Physics is a very important part of games. Games like mario 64 would be nothing without it.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 07, 2005, 08:22:30 PM
Perm: Where did M64 have physics? It had a VERY basic and predictable system, modern day physics systems are a lot less predictable.
Post by: Talon on June 07, 2005, 09:26:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
pudu: Still, the GPUs they put in consoles nowadays cost around 300 for the PC as well.
Perm: Where did M64 have physics? It had a VERY basic and predictable system, modern day physics systems are a lot less predictable.
All 3d games use physics no matter how basic you may perceive them to be. Objects moving in a 3d environment require an understanding of motion which is part of what physics is all about, not to mention the lighting, explosions, your viewing angle etc.
I dont think mario 64 is a basic game, I think its quite complex.
Post by: pudu on June 07, 2005, 10:41:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
pudu: Still, the GPUs they put in consoles nowadays cost around 300 for the PC as well.
You do have a point there. I'm amazed at how consoles come out at around 2-300 dollars and if you were to buy the components individually they would cost 3+ times what they cost when you buy them with the console. The thing is I know Microsoft and Sony sell their consoles for fairly big losses and Nintendo usually sells theirs for a profit AND sells them for less. All I'm trying to say is that if it were Sony or Microsoft we were talking about I would be a lot less skeptical of the idea of a PPU being added but given Nintendo's way of doing business I find it hard to believe it may actual happen.
Post by: Talon on June 08, 2005, 12:23:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pudu
You do have a point there. I'm amazed at how consoles come out at around 2-300 dollars and if you were to buy the components individually they would cost 3+ times what they cost when you buy them with the console. The thing is I know Microsoft and Sony sell their consoles for fairly big losses and Nintendo usually sells theirs for a profit AND sells them for less. All I'm trying to say is that if it were Sony or Microsoft we were talking about I would be a lot less skeptical of the idea of a PPU being added but given Nintendo's way of doing business I find it hard to believe it may actual happen.
Dont forget that these companies are mass purchasing and they would be buying the gpu's or whatever at alot cheaper price than what you could buy the same or similar component at retail for.
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on June 08, 2005, 02:13:24 AM
Thats alot different that a company buying/licensing<sp> the chips(in bulk), then custom fitting them into their own setup, and handling all packaging, shipment and advertising on their own.
Am I wrong?
its 4:12 in the morning and I am drunk, I hope I make sense
Post by: KDR_11k on June 08, 2005, 03:09:25 AM
Talon: You have a bit of a misconception of what constitutes physics in a game. Games are chjeaters extraordinaire when it comes to physics and graphics, very few things use the proper formulas. Lighting in a game isn't physics, explosions aren't physics (they are objects that apply damage and force* to other objects based on a falloff over distance, sometimes with a ray cast to prevent them from hitting targets behind cover). Player movement is HIGHLY simplified physics, usually there is only one law of physics implemented and that's gravity (usually with a different power than earth actually has). Mario is an entity that accelerates downward as long as no obstacle is under him and accellerates horizontally according to A-stick movement (unless he's on a slope that's flagged as slippery in which case he'll accellerate according to ground slope). His velocity is multiplied by a "friction" value that is probably constant unless the surface is flagged as slippery or his state is "sliding" (game entities are finite state engines). You might call that logic physics but usually it's only worthy of being called physics when it's a proper simulation that can at least simulate rigid body movements using gravity, object interaction (how much of that happens in SM64? The objects either move on, don't move at all or bounce back by a predefined amount) friction, etc. Where every object is somewhat equal and behaves according to a set of parameters that completely define it (is mass even implemented in SM64?).
*= Force doesn't exist unless you use a physics simulation, otherwise it just adds a bit to the movement vector, that's not proper physics.
Post by: Talon on June 08, 2005, 03:28:58 AM
Oh and on a side note physics just isnt about force, it is also about motion so the vectors you use to move an object is proper physics and force is another element you add to them.
Post by: ThePerm on June 08, 2005, 06:53:30 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on June 08, 2005, 09:14:01 AM
yes the formulas for having mario move on a frictionless surface are simple and they increase in complexity as the friction changes
No, they don't get more complex, they simply multiply the speed with a larger constant.
when i said that mario 64 is complex i was really comparing it to previous incarnations of mario on the snes and nes.
Except for the third dimension (which behaves exactly like the previous x direction) and the "sliding" state I don't see a difference there. Oh, yeah, he can grab onto a ledge but that's an if-then condition, not dynamic interaction (IF close enough to edge THEN go into state "hanging"). Physics would be if it checked for collision between his hand and the world and stopped him and appied the proper forces when he climbs up instead of replaying an animation and changing his position by a predefined value.
If you define a vector that is added to the object position each frame as physics that's your thing, to me that's still basic game logic. Physics would mean that if you kicked the goomba he'd roll down the hill or something like that.
Post by: vudu on June 08, 2005, 11:15:34 AM
Post by: oohhboy on June 09, 2005, 02:11:14 AM
Shortcuts are taken because it would be simply silly to simulate how much friction Mario's hand has when he is trying to catch a ledge. It would take up alot of processor time which could have to been put to better use.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 09, 2005, 02:58:55 AM
vudu: Naah, I just think about that stuff when I want to think about it.
Post by: ThePerm on June 09, 2005, 06:53:08 AM
Post by: Galford on June 12, 2005, 04:16:57 PM
I can see both KDR's and everbody else's point about physics.
Can't we just get a long?
