Then what about this? https://github.com/NVIDIAGameWorks/PhysX/tree/4.1/physx
They don't follow semver. v4 is basically a completely separate product from v5.
Nvidia PhysX 5.0
31–40 of 113 posts
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#32What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
It's not quite as easy as slapping on a good physics engine and call it a day.
A good integration with a decent physics engine feels better in-game than a superb physics engine with a bad integration.
When programming physics there's many ways of getting the desired behavior from the physics system, and as with all problem solving some solutions are better/more stable than others.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#33What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
The Noita game features huge 2D levels where gasses and liquids interact with magic spells. Teardown has completely destructible voxel levels. BeamNG driving simulation implements soft bodies, various experiments with its physics are popular on youtube. I don't think any of these use PhysX.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#34What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
A Kerbal Space Program with an on ramp to the world's observatory catalogs and focus on learning instruments and physics, theoretical and applied, would be awesome from Nvidia.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#35I always deselect this when I install the nVidia driver in Windows. I play none of the few games that are supposedly enhanced by it.
You probably do, as unreal engine and unity both use physx. Just not the old system level libraries that are used for old games.
Incidentally UE with 4.26+ (and more so 5, which is almost a complete cutover) switches from PhysX to their in-house solution of Chaos.
A lot of it has to do with determinism over the network IIUC.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#36What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
The reason is money - it costs money (artists) to make destructible objects and art down for every conceivable way it can be broken/destroyed/manipulated.
I hope/pray for a Battlefield 7 game that actually takes this seriously, but EA has run Battlefield into the ground.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#37What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
apart from games going from 2k to 4k to 8k, there hasn't been any noticeable improvement in realism in the past 10 years. ray tracing if enabled looks nice but that's pretty much the height of it, characters look just as janky as they did 10 years ago. I feel the primary reason are the consoles, game devs can't push the boundaries as most consoles are around 5-6 years behind gaming PCs.
10 years is two console generations ago, 2012 was still ps3/xb360 era. If you don't notice any difference, then that is more explained by your lack of paying attention than lack of improvement.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#38What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
It's not quite as easy as slapping on a good physics engine and call it a day. A good integration with a decent physics engine feels better in-game than a superb physics engine with a bad integration. When programming physics there's many ways of getting the desired behavior from the physics system, and as with all problem solving some solutions are better/more stable than others.
I don't doubt there are compromises being made. I guess I'm just a bit surprised that immersion via realistic physics isn't in higher (and competing) demand. It also seems to me there could be a lot of interesting gameplay mechanics to explore there.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
And only on PC and Mobile. Not on console.
Consoles and open source do not mix. NDAs prevent code using their APIs from being released. That said, a lot of open source projects have console ports, they just can’t be shared publicly.
Steam Deck is in disagreement.
Re: Nvidia PhysX 5.0
#40What are some games that have impressive physics nowadays? I remember being very impressed with Half-Life 2 back in the day, seemed like a leap. All spectacular looking games with crude physics nowadays remind me of those hi-res ports of old console titles, in an ajar way.
Maybe Teardown would be interesting for you.