News Microsoft says no physics API?

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07/26/microsoft_says_no_physics_api/

 

Is that pic CG? if so whats if from :b

Darn you MS, had the power to make one physics solution a reality..

 

lol What the hell has Paris Hilton got to do with pysics??

 

seriously, paris only deals with being a dirty dirty whor*. why does she have to be shown anywhere... especially in the wonder known as bit-tech!

good to see physics is dying, if all a 300 dollar card does is make some extra mail come from mailboxes or a tree explode... well thats just dumb.

anyways, what happened to physics engines like.... oh Quake 4 engine or the doom 3 engine, all with physics engines...

good article, thanks for the place to rant!

 

I think Havok FX eventually supporting ATI and nVidia acceleration will be the future of physics in the PC environment. Either than or nVidia will devise a custom solution.

 

Noo, this isn't a good thing. DirectPhysics was the best chance gamers and game developers had of introducing lots of physics enabled games. The software is the most important thing when it comes to new technology like this. Havok and Agia have their own software but they are both proprietary and closed. DirectPhysics would be free and open which means you'd see all sorts of support for it on PPUs GPUs and CPUs giving you the best choice possible.

 

damn, that wh0r3 needs some meet on her

 

I totaly agree with DeX. MS is completly overlooking this oppertunity. Proberly ending somewhere in the future with buying out a company named Havok

 

Well i'm not surprised to be honest. I dont see what the point would be anyway. There a middleware physics engines out there which i guess are already on 360 and ps3 so microsoft see themselves as why bother reinventing the wheel.

 

To be honest I can't see it being much of an issue in the near/upcoming future.

Mainly due to the rate at which cpu's are expected to handle more and more complexity and calculations; dual, quad and even 8 cored chips. Provided the developers actually sort their @rses from their elbows out and implement proper multithreading to handle the cores, each game can implement whatever physics API they want -- dedicated threads or even a whole core could be set aside for it.

Of course you're then presented with the IO throughput of the more objs to simulate "visually" on the GPU side - but even then mobo's and gpu's memry bandwidths and processing capabilities are increasing month by month.

I don;t think we need to really worry about dedicated "chips" or cards for physic APIs -- the cpu's and gpu's of the future will handle it all..

/wonders how to implement Havok on his C64...

 

Most of the time developers rarely even use physics, and if they do its just eye candy and nothing more (ghost recon AW or FEAR for example). The only games I have seen use physics with gameplay is Half-life 2 and Psi-Ops.