More realistic crashes

Discussion in 'Ideas and Suggestions' started by rocksim, May 12, 2016.

  1. rocksim

    rocksim
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2014
    Messages:
    372
    Ok, that title was probrably confusing, but I have an idea. When a car gets into a crash, little bits of plastic, glass, and the occupants flesh go flying around and all over the road, not to mention fluids like coolant, oil, gas, or DEF if it's a diesel. Anyone who has been in a crash, seen a crash, or watched a crash test video will know what I'm talking about. Please share your thoughts on the subject.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    Anyone that uses the search knows this aint new...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. TheSmoak

    TheSmoak
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    Messages:
    6
    I like the idea!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Aaronaitor

    Aaronaitor
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2016
    Messages:
    76
    This would dramatically reduce the framerate, great idea, but with people that have GPUs like me, it won't work well.
     
  5. Dr. Death

    Dr. Death
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 12, 2016
    Messages:
    1,920
    *CPU. Actually. And yes. It would be a framerate torture, but it wouldn't be far-stretch that if this gets added it could be quickly improved. Things like shards of glass or plastic dont even need to be physical objects, they could work as particles affected by gravity with basic models and no textures, or maybe they just dissapear after some time, so that the computer doesn't has to render them.

    The thing about the gore, i think that the devs stated that they dont want the game to be overly violent, so if they do add people in the cars, i dont think they would add a realistic visual on death for them.

    About the liquids spilling out..... Now THAT is a challenge, because it would have to be a rendered liquid that would fall to the ground, and depending on what kind of surface it falls on have different effects, and if you want diesel to spill to asphalt and STILL be able to light up, it means that there needs to be an entirely new set of physic coding just for that.

    It would still be nice to be added tho, but it might be too much trouble for what's worth. At least right now.
     
  6. Finnb.

    Finnb.
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Messages:
    18
    The liquids pooring out of the car don't actually have to have the liquid physics like in blender or something, they could well be like the petrol gushing out of your car like when your gas tank gets shot in gta 5. The liquid could be like some kind of texture overlay.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. ThreeDTech21

    ThreeDTech21
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,614
    And this is why Nvidia should have never purchased PhysX from Ageia, R.I.P PPU processing :mad:
     
  8. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    PhysX can run CPU accelerated on AMD rigs. PhysX isnt needed for this technology. PhysX in general is crap. PhysX for GPU processing just uses Nvidia CUDA (originally of course Ageia CUDA), you could use CUDA direct instead of PhysX. CUDA has a rival, OpenCL, which works on both AMD and NVidia GPUs.

    All in all. Your post is both irrelevant and the final point is not true.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. rocksim

    rocksim
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2014
    Messages:
    372
    Ok, but some ideas and the way I expressed it were. Sorry for dissapointing you, I try to do my best not to make people sad.
     
  10. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    no seriously, not one thing there was remotely new, most of them have even been expressed in further detail.
     
  11. rocksim

    rocksim
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2014
    Messages:
    372
    The gore joke was new. Please don't get butt hurt about this as there is no reason.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    the gore is not new. People in cars getting injured has been suggested before,
     
  13. ThreeDTech21

    ThreeDTech21
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,614
    PhysX as it is now is crap, but if it were developed more by the original company (over the years of course) it would be excellent for things like debris which was in the OP post #1 "When a car gets into a crash, little bits of plastic, glass, and the occupants flesh go flying around and all over the road, not to mention fluids like coolant, oil, gas, or DEF if it's a diesel"

    PhysX was originally built to handle massive amounts of debris which is revelant to the OP post, Nvidia purchased the Tech and decided to add it to their GPUs instead of developing it as a stand alone tech (PPU Card)

    Dumbed-down version:

    Original Post: wish there was more debris

    My post: Physx would have been good if developed more (Nvidia shouldn't have purchased it)

    Reason: Physx was meant to handle massive amounts of debris

    Nvidia did a massive disservice to us all by effectively killing PhysX, Imagine games with 5000+ pieces of debris on screen at 60fps, This is a tech that is overlooked because we just don't have it, Oh but what it could have been
     
    #13 ThreeDTech21, May 13, 2016
    Last edited: May 13, 2016
  14. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    And my point.

    PhysX can run on the CPU instead of on CUDA (something NVidia never changed, even under Ageia, PhysX used either CPU or CUDA where available, PPU's were simply CUDA cards, Nvidia integrated CUDA into their GPUs), PhysX isnt needed for debris, raw OpenCL can manage it for both AMD and NVidia GPUs.
     
  15. ThreeDTech21

    ThreeDTech21
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,614
    And how is on-loading PPU onto a CPU better? wouldnt a stand-alone card be far superior? Adding it to a GPU or a CPU slows both by some percent. A stand-alone PPU is superior to both solutions.
     
  16. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    How many times do I have to reiterate the point that NVidia changed absolutely nothing except discontinuing standalone CUDA cards in favour of integrating CUDA onto their GPUs instead... (should note, even the first gen NVidia cards with CUDA matched the Ageia standalone ones for CUDA performance)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. ThreeDTech21

    ThreeDTech21
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,614
    Exactly what im saying, adding CUDA (PhysX it to the actual GPU. A stand alone card would have been better, A separate company making Cuda Cards (PhysX Cards) would be superior to a GPU company adding it to the GPU circuitry (less space, heat, less resources, etc.) a full PPU card has more space (less heat) and specialized development by a company working on PPUs only. I think your having trouble grasping that concept?

    Again dumbed-down

    Agiea: I want to work on PPUs

    Nvidia: I want to work on GPUs

    Nvidia: I will buy the PPU tech

    Nvidia: I want to work on GPUs (and put a little effort into PPUs)

    Nvidia has done well with PPUs just not as good as a stand alone company

    So it is true Nvidia should not have purchased PhysX R.I.P PPUs :mad:
     
  18. SixSixSevenSeven

    SixSixSevenSeven
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,966
    Ageia went bust. First gen NVidia cards to support CUDA matched Ageia for CUDA performance. Nvidia cards were the same price as Ageia ones (they were hugely overpriced under Ageia, seriously, same money would buy you an NVidia GPU supporting CUDA rather than a CUDA only card, and yet it performed the same plus did graphics). They;ve gotten a whole ton faster since.

    Or. JUST USE FUCKING OPENCL WHICH IS SUPPORTED ON NVIDIA AND AMD GRAPHICS CARDS. I think you're having trouble grasping that concept.
     
  19. ThreeDTech21

    ThreeDTech21
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,614
    Or. JUST USE :mad:FUCKING:mad: OPENCL WHICH IS SUPPORTED ON NVIDIA AND AMD GRAPHICS CARDS. I think you're having trouble grasping that concept

    o_O
     
    #19 ThreeDTech21, May 13, 2016
    Last edited: May 13, 2016
  20. carnox7

    carnox7
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2014
    Messages:
    198
    CAN YOU PLEASE STOP WITH THE PROFANITY
    just please read this
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice