• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Batman: Arkham City PC DX11/3D Vision/PhysX effects detailed

May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
http://translate.google.com/transla...e-Grafik-in-der-PC-Version/Action-Spiel/News/


PCGH: Does the PC version of Batman: Arkham City as its predecessor, Batman: Arkham Asylum Nvidia Physx physics API, including support for the graphics chip calculated by physics?

Ben Wyatt: Yes, as with the PC version of Arkam Asylum are also used in Batman: Arkham City, realistic smoke, debris, leaves and paper used, which are calculated by the GPU Physx. But there will also feature, among other things, in clothing of the characters in Batman: Arkham Asyslum were still not admire.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: What are the different modules APEX (APEX Clothing / Particles / Destruction) puts her in Batman: Arkham City is? Can you give examples of where the modules are to use?

Ben Wyatt: In the PC version of Batman: Arkham City is destructable APEX destructible elements in the game for all to use - including walls and objects that will be torn down during the fighting. APEX Clothing gives the clothes of many characters, you will encounter in the game a realistic look and simulates the physics of paper or leaves. Furthermore, the cloth simulation for all platforms in many of the cutscenes can be seen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: What are the visual differences between the CPU and GPU calculated by physics?

Ben Wyatt: The addition in the PC version calculated by Phyx GPU physics effects enhance the realism of the game visible. The player fights as Batman and Catwoman against the evil that he can observe, such as walls collapse, debris and bits of paper flying around, the smoke reacts realistically and the clothing of the opponent physically moves correctly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: What are visually complex physics effects without sacrificing player compatible GPU Physx card? What can not be calculated by processor?

Ben Wyatt: All Physx and APEX features can be calculated from both the CPU and Nvidia GPUs. However, it is expected that the title without Nvidia GPU acceleration will run significantly slower when additional Physx effects are switched on. Therefore, we recommend an Nvidia graphics chip for all additional Physx features.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: Does your one have the latest PhysX SDK 3? If so, what benefits the SDK offers three compared with previous versions.

Ben Wyatt: Currently uses Batman: Arkham City is Physx 2.8.4.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: Do you deliver the PC version of Batman: Arkham Asylum from a DX11 support?

Ben Wyatt: Yes. In addition, is Batman: Arkham Asyslum shipped with support for Nvidia 3D vision, 3D vision with cutscenes included in the full HD resolution, both the DX9 and DX11 graphics interface.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: What do you think are the crucial advantage of DX11/des shader model 5? How can the rendering process can be simplified respectively optimized? Which DX11 feature the game benefits the most?

Ben Wyatt:
1st DX11 tessellation: Our designers have added manually for many, throughout the whole game assets distributed by the rounding off of objects more polygons and / or displacement mapping. This keeps the game for a better visual quality as well as a detailed game world.

2nd Texture arrays (since DX10 available) are used to simplify the rendering of the protagonist by the player-controlled (Batman / Catwoman) cast shadows and speed. This shadow algorithm could be implemented as a so-called texture Altas DX9, but that would have been much more complicated and slower.

3rd DX11 Compute Shaders: We have improved the original in the renderer of the Unreal Engine 3 integrated SSAO algorithm under DX11, as we can perform additional rendering work. The DX11 compute shaders to accelerate, we use the AO-generation and the blur pass by, we cache the texture values ​​in the so-called shared memory to reduce the number of texture fetches. This speeds up the entire rendering process and improves quality.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

PCGH: Sets the use of their DX11 focus on accelerating the rendering process, or rather to a significant improvement in visual quality? What graphics features, players with a DX9 graphics card is not seen? Will also support the DX11 rendering path?

Ben Wyatt: Batman: Arkham City improved using the Shader Model 5, the look, without sacrificing performance. A DX10 support is not available. The DX11 look different on each case substantially from the console or DX9 graphics.

Compared with the DX9 version of the DX11 counterpart has to offer the following graph Extras:

1st More details at tessellated geometric objects, such as vines and other organic shapes and more architectural details on buildings. The biggest difference rendering the invisible triangles and added additional details by displacement mapping. The whole thing is visible especially at the silhouettes of objects as well as in games with 3D vision, come out where the displacement mapping details more clearly.

2nd A more pronounced spatial reference thanks to DX11 SSAO, which is seen particularly at the stage-by-GPU Physx debris, leaves or paper. These objects then have a real acting on the ground, rather unreal to hover over it.

3rd Contact-called hardening soft shadows at all dynamic shadows, either controlled by the player or Catwoman Batman throws. Under DX9, the shadows silhouette with decreasing distance to the shadow-casting object is not smooth - it looks considerably less realistic.
 

Mama Robotnik

Member
Apr 11, 2008
7,999
15
985
Really wish a journalist would grow some balls and quiz them on their Games for Windows Live bullshit.

Q: Why did you pick a fucking broken mess of a system to run your great game on, when far better and more popular alternatives are available that don't randomly delete your customers' savegames and occasionally make their purchases unplayable?

I know they'll probably deflect the answer, but goddamnit ask the important question.
 

Snuggles

erotic butter maelstrom
Dec 15, 2008
39,509
0
730
34
nowhere
www.neogaf.com
Mama Robotnik said:
Really wish a journalist would grow some balls and quiz them on their Games for Windows Live bullshit.

Q: Why did you pick a fucking broken mess of a system to run your great game on, when far better and more popular alternatives are available that don't randomly delete your customers' savegames and occasionally make their purchases unplayable?

I know they'll probably deflect the answer, but goddamnit ask the important question.

It is troubling that they would put so much effort into the PC port only to use a DRM system that nobody (whose opinion matters) likes.

Anyways, hopefully the performance is as good as AA so I can take advantage of this features without any major slowdown. Phsyx is awesome when implemented right.
 

Barack Lesnar

Banned
Jun 7, 2010
19,179
0
0
Mama Robotnik said:
Really wish a journalist would grow some balls and quiz them on their Games for Windows Live bullshit.

Q: Why did you pick a fucking broken mess of a system to run your great game on, when far better and more popular alternatives are available that don't randomly delete your customers' savegames and occasionally make their purchases unplayable?

I know they'll probably deflect the answer, but goddamnit ask the important question.
Probably because it only happens to a small minority of customers that continually rage about it on forums.
 
May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
Heavy said:
Probably because it only happens to a small minority of customers that continually rage about it on forums.

So this is what they were thinking...

"Hey guys we did a research and only 2% of our customers lost their saves! I guess we'll keep using this, because honestly who the fuck cares about those 2%, yes?"
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,866
11
1,765
Physx is such bullshit. The first Batman game had some "physx-only" effects that I've seen on friggin' PS2 games. But of course when you turn that shit on with a ATI card it runs like putrid ass.
 
Mar 10, 2005
50,827
5
0
www.theimrankhan.com
Heavy said:
Probably because it only happens to a small minority of customers that continually rage about it on forums.
Do you have numbers to back this up or is this only your assertion because it has not personally happened to you and is, at best, anecdotal?

Throwing around terms like "a small minority" seems to imply you have percentages at hand.
 
May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
ShockingAlberto said:
Do you have numbers to back this up or is this only your assertion because it has not personally happened to you and is, at best, anecdotal?

Throwing around terms like "a small minority" seems to imply you have percentages at hand.

Nah, the only fact is that those that DO want GFWL in this game are "a small minority". :p
 

epmode

Member
Jun 7, 2004
28,470
0
0
Heavy said:
Probably because it only happens to a small minority of customers that continually rage about it on forums.
It's happened to me in two separate GFWL games and I can't remember it ever happening in anything else. Not to mention how the stupid achievement-protecting copy protection makes GFWL saves much harder to move around than anything else.

Losing every single savegame is pretty much the equivalent a nuclear meltdown when it comes to videogames. It really, really sucks.
 
Mar 10, 2005
50,827
5
0
www.theimrankhan.com
I think it's totally possible to have a survey asking if GFWL has ever prevented you from playing a game or deleting your save file and it is entirely possible the majority of people answering the poll could answer "No, it's been fine."

I just haven't been made aware of any such poll being done and apparently Heavy might?
 

Traumahound

Member
Jun 9, 2004
905
0
1,410
Canada
jett said:
Physx is such bullshit. The first Batman game had some "physx-only" effects that I've seen on friggin' PS2 games. But of course when you turn that shit on with a ATI card it runs like putrid ass.
Totally agreed. They're using DX11 so why aren't they using the standard DirectX physics API? (because nvidia is paying them, I know. It's a rhetorical question)
 

jett

D-Member
Jun 6, 2004
98,866
11
1,765
Traumahound said:
Totally agreed. They're using DX11 so why aren't they using the standard DirectX physics API? (because nvidia is paying them, I know. It's a rhetorical question)

Nivdia should just fuck off. Thankfully the list of physx-compatible games is anemic.
 
May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
Traumahound said:
Totally agreed. They're using DX11 so why aren't they using the standard DirectX physics API? (because nvidia is paying them, I know. It's a rhetorical question)

And build a physics solution from scratch just for those that have PCs with high end DX11 graphics cards? Would that be a wise decision to invest so much money into R&D, etc?

The API is just an API, it's not a toolset, it's nothing that can be used by itself.
 
Jun 8, 2004
3,837
0
0
Australia
jett said:
Physx is such bullshit. The first Batman game had some "physx-only" effects that I've seen on friggin' PS2 games. But of course when you turn that shit on with a ATI card it runs like putrid ass.

Yep they bogged it for ATI cards.

Fucking bullshit. And it looks to continue.
 
May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
jett said:
Physx is such bullshit. The first Batman game had some "physx-only" effects that I've seen on friggin' PS2 games. But of course when you turn that shit on with a ATI card it runs like putrid ass.

Right, so, if you've seen them on PS2 games, does this mean they've been *removed* from the PS360 versions of the game? Or are the new consoles slower than the PS2..
 

fizzelopeguss

Banned
Nov 1, 2007
6,320
0
0
jett said:
Nivdia should just fuck off. Thankfully the list of physx-compatible games is anemic.

Astounding levels of butthurt over features that wouldn't even be included in the game if it wasn't for Nvidia moneyhats.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Jun 9, 2004
51,621
2,199
2,035
www.eurogamer.net
Right, so, if you've seen them on PS2 games, does this mean they've been *removed* from the PS360 versions of the game? Or are the new consoles slower than the PS2..
Of course not, but the end result of the physics is the first game are not worth the performance hit. I'm sure the math behind those physics far exceeds anything we've ever seen on PS2, but what the end user sees is not significantly better.

I have to agree with him on that. The additions were not particularly impressive.

That said, I haven't been able to enjoy Phys-X in any game really. When I was using a GTX460 for a bit, anything Phys-X tanked the framerate and now that I'm using ATI, it's even worse. It just isn't worth the hit even if it can look very cool (such as in Mirror's Edge).
 

markot

Banned
Aug 21, 2008
18,838
0
0
fizzelopeguss said:
Astounding levels of butthurt over features that wouldn't even be included in the game if it wasn't for Nvidia moneyhats.
>_<?

Their moneyhats are moneytraps!
 

Brofist

Member
Jun 15, 2004
11,025
1,287
1,765
dark10x said:
Of course not, but the end result of the physics is the first game are not worth the performance hit. I'm sure the math behind those physics far exceeds anything we've ever seen on PS2, but what the end user sees is not significantly better.

I have to agree with him on that. The additions were not particularly impressive.

That said, I haven't been able to enjoy Phys-X in any game really. When I was using a GTX460 for a bit, anything Phys-X tanked the framerate and now that I'm using ATI, it's even worse. It just isn't worth the hit even if it can look very cool (such as in Mirror's Edge).

I thought the effect was nice myself, and I didn't see a performance hit on my GTX480 (well there may have been but it ran at 60fps 90% of the time so I couldn't see it). Plus it is optional, no reason for anyone to be hurt over this when it can be turned off completely.
 

Jin34

Member
Oct 24, 2009
4,380
0
0
jett said:
Physx is such bullshit. The first Batman game had some "physx-only" effects that I've seen on friggin' PS2 games. But of course when you turn that shit on with a ATI card it runs like putrid ass.

So true. I remember one of the effects was the volumetric frog and I was: "Oh you mean like Rogue Squadron? Only with the power of PhysX can we bring you the effects of GC launch games".
 
May 22, 2011
7,255
0
0
Jin34 said:
So true. I remember one of the effects was the volumetric frog and I was: "Oh you mean like Rogue Squadron? Only with the power of PhysX can we bring you the effects of GC launch games".

I admit frogs aren't that impressive :p
 

Thunderbear

Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
May 10, 2006
3,364
0
0
Really want to get the PC version, but it is GFWL only right? That really does make it a tough choice for me. I'm annoyed as it is that I have to use Origin to play Battlefield 3...

Wish everything was just on one service, preferably Steam.
 

Thunderbear

Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
May 10, 2006
3,364
0
0
Jin34 said:
So true. I remember one of the effects was the volumetric frog and I was: "Oh you mean like Rogue Squadron? Only with the power of PhysX can we bring you the effects of GC launch games".

Different type of volumetric fog...
 

itxaka

Defeatist
Feb 21, 2007
11,446
0
1,445
Bioshock
Isn't apex clothing a heavy gpu dependant effect? I remember that Mafia 2 suffered way too much for using something like that, which I had to disable.
 

Jin34

Member
Oct 24, 2009
4,380
0
0
Thunderbear said:
Different type of volumetric fog...

That wasn't very impressive either way. Just use Havok and not this piss poor implementations that kill performance. The hit Nvidia cards take for some PhysX effects compared to what you are getting are very disproportionate.
 

Chinner

Banned
Mar 14, 2007
27,878
0
0
Forkball said:
Stupid NVidia and their technology. WHAT DO ATI'ERS GET?
a pat on the back.

you choice the wrong graphics vendor, but you did good bro, you did real good.
 

Barrel Cannon

Member
Feb 17, 2010
3,860
4
670
Canada
jett said:
Physx is such bullshit. The first Batman game had some "physx-only" effects that I've seen on friggin' PS2 games. But of course when you turn that shit on with a ATI card it runs like putrid ass.
I remember when oblivion came out a lot people were trying to make do with bloom lighting because it was a lot less hard hitting on your game performance. Now any decent build can maintain a 60+ frame rate with hdr on. If you sink maybe like 50 bucks you can easily find a 9000 Nvidia series card for your phsyx computing. Heck I just got a 20$ 9600gt.
Traumahound said:
Totally agreed. They're using DX11 so why aren't they using the standard DirectX physics API? (because nvidia is paying them, I know. It's a rhetorical question)
This however is true. But I'd rather play with some advanced physics instead of nothing or barely nothing. I guess I'm getting sucked into Nvidia's scheme.
 

Barack Lesnar

Banned
Jun 7, 2010
19,179
0
0
Well, Mama Robotnik is a unique case as he (or she?) has said that every game he's tried on GFWL has had huge problems with saves and other stuff... every single one. And he makes it a point to mention it in every GFWL-related thread and the posts give off this vibe that his case where nothing works is a widespread issue. Recently I compiled quotes from 2 GFWL threads of lots of people saying they've had no issues with it.

This is just a theory but I believe many of the issues with saves and other things happened with older GFWL games. Batman AA was infamous with the save game corruption, but that came out in 2009. All of my experience with GFWL is from the past year so I have this theory that the client updates fixed some of those notorious bugs and it doesn't happen with the newer games as often.

Can anyone who owns and has played...

Bulletstorm
Virtua Tennis 4
AoE Online (not beta)
Fable III

...let us know if you've had issues? Those are the 3 recent games I've played extensively (about ~50 hours total) and have had no problems at all with. Also about 10 smooth hours in Bioshock 2 but that came out a couple years ago.

EDIT: Fable III is also a recent release. Only put an hour into that due to how terrible it was, though. Worst 12 bucks I've ever spent.
 

plagiarize

Banned
May 24, 2006
41,130
1
0
dark10x said:
Of course not, but the end result of the physics is the first game are not worth the performance hit. I'm sure the math behind those physics far exceeds anything we've ever seen on PS2, but what the end user sees is not significantly better.

I have to agree with him on that. The additions were not particularly impressive.

That said, I haven't been able to enjoy Phys-X in any game really. When I was using a GTX460 for a bit, anything Phys-X tanked the framerate and now that I'm using ATI, it's even worse. It just isn't worth the hit even if it can look very cool (such as in Mirror's Edge).
i have a dedicated Phys-X gpu. it's my old Nvidia card from before i upgraded to a 5870 when those came out. with a hybrid set up you can still do accelerated physx. some games over do it to the point of frame drops no matter what you do, but batman (and mirrors edge, and a few others) hardly took a hit with PhysX on if you had a dedicated GPU.

i'm more interested to know if they're giving everyone AA this time, or if i have to spoof my vendor type and all that again. could just use MLAA i guess.
 

dr_rus

Member
May 3, 2007
10,983
0
1,350
Moscow, Russia
Traumahound said:
Totally agreed. They're using DX11 so why aren't they using the standard DirectX physics API? (because nvidia is paying them, I know. It's a rhetorical question)
There is no "standard DirectX physics API". I'm sure they'd use it if someone would provide them with it. Until then it's better to have PhysX in there than nothing at all.
 

Pimpbaa

Member
Jun 8, 2004
17,348
719
1,705
45
Canada
Jin34 said:
That wasn't very impressive either way. Just use Havok and not this piss poor implementations that kill performance. The hit Nvidia cards take for some PhysX effects compared to what you are getting are very disproportionate.

My overclocked geforce 460 can run AA with physx on high and at 60fps at a resolution of 1080p. Hardly performance killing.
 

Varna

Member
Dec 6, 2008
5,978
0
0
Pimpbaa said:
My overclocked geforce 460 can run AA with physx on high and at 60fps at a resolution of 1080p. Hardly performance killing.

I really doubt this. My OC'd 580gtx can't do that. My OC'd 580gtx WITH a dedicated OC'd 460gtx could barely do this.

PhysX just sucks performance wise. In the new Alice I don't think there is a system on the planet that would not have it's frame-rate cut in half if you allowed the smoke from the pepper grinder to build up. Similar stuff in Mirror's Edge.

EDIT: I should say the scaling for it when using a dedicated card really sucks. All that extra power and heat and it only nets you a very small increase.
 

InertiaXr

Member
Aug 6, 2009
1,288
0
0
KS, USA
Heavy said:
Well, Mama Robotnik is a unique case as he (or she?) has said that every game he's tried on GFWL has had huge problems with saves and other stuff... every single one. And he makes it a point to mention it in every GFWL-related thread and the posts give off this vibe that his case where nothing works is a widespread issue. Recently I compiled quotes from 2 GFWL threads of lots of people saying they've had no issues with it.

This is just a theory but I believe many of the issues with saves and other things happened with older GFWL games. Batman AA was infamous with the save game corruption, but that came out in 2009. All of my experience with GFWL is from the past year so I have this theory that the client updates fixed some of those notorious bugs and it doesn't happen with the newer games as often.

Can anyone who owns and has played...

Bulletstorm
Virtua Tennis 4
AoE Online (not beta)
Fable III

...let us know if you've had issues? Those are the 3 recent games I've played extensively (about ~50 hours total) and have had no problems at all with. Also about 10 smooth hours in Bioshock 2 but that came out a couple years ago.

EDIT: Fable III is also a recent release. Only put an hour into that due to how terrible it was, though. Worst 12 bucks I've ever spent.



fresquito said:
I had freezing issues too. It turned ou my autosave was corrupted (I hadn't even finished my first GP x-D)

Orgun said:
I had the same thing but I had done practice, quali and the melbourne race and then had to do it again. This time I said fuck it to quali, loaded a setup with 11/11 for the race and went from 24th to 2nd.


Page 28 of the F1 2011 thread, these 2 guys both have save corruption, and that game came out like 3 days ago?

I think the correct 'theory' in this case is that GFWL sucks
 

aeolist

Banned
Oct 31, 2006
17,538
0
0
I'm just glad that PhysX being vendor-specific means that game designers can never use it for anything important without cutting off a huge percentage of their market.
 

Rodney McKay

Member
Jun 13, 2009
10,180
0
0
Heavy said:
Can anyone who owns and has played...

[GFWL games]

...let us know if you've had issues?
I've had login issues in the past with a few GFWL games (Dawn of War 2, a racing game I can't remember), but if there is even a chance that a game with GFWL will have its save randomly deleted then it's not a system I want ANY of my games to have.

The advantages are nice (Xbox Live integration, friend list, achievements) but as someone who almost exclusively plays single player games and has no interest in achievements (thank you PC gaming for cleansing me of that) GFWL is just another layer on top of my games. When it works I don't care about it, but when it doesn't work it stops me from playing my games.

GFWL is not enough to stop me from buying a game that has it, but I feel like I've just bought a 3rd party memory card and it's just a matter of time before something bad happens.
 

Red

Member
Feb 16, 2008
23,686
2
0
Chinner said:
a pat on the back.

you choice the wrong graphics vendor, but you did good bro, you did real good.
What about those of us with hybrid set ups?
 

jackdoe

Member
Jan 16, 2011
6,132
1
0
dr_rus said:
There is no "standard DirectX physics API". I'm sure they'd use it if someone would provide them with it. Until then it's better to have PhysX in there than nothing at all.
Yeah... I didn't think so. Otherwise, there would be no reason to bother with Havok.
 

gdt

Member
Oct 20, 2007
40,428
2
0
32
Pennsylvania
When I tried to play Bulletstorm, I had to activate my live/GFWL account. It didn't recognize it for like an hour. And then it had to update forever. That's the only GFWL experience I had, and it sucked.

Achievements were nice though.
 

Pimpbaa

Member
Jun 8, 2004
17,348
719
1,705
45
Canada
Varna said:
I really doubt this. My OC'd 580gtx can't do that. My OC'd 580gtx WITH a dedicated OC'd 460gtx could barely do this.

Something wrong with your setup. Trying just using the 580 for both the rendering and the physx. The Physx stuff in AA isn't demanding at all.
 

Kerrby

Banned
Feb 1, 2010
2,184
0
0
OZSTRAYLA
Lesiroth said:
inb4 GFWL=No Buy

It's true though, I wanted to play SFIV yesterday and had to encounter GFWL again. First it said I had to sign in to save my progress, then I had to download an update which took forever, then it closed the game to install the update and then my computer restarted.
 

jackdoe

Member
Jan 16, 2011
6,132
1
0
Pimpbaa said:
Something wrong with your setup. Trying just using the 580 for both the rendering and the physx. The Physx stuff in AA isn't demanding at all.
Yep. With a GTX 460 and a 9800GTX as a dedicated PhysX card, I'm getting 50-60 fps. Of course, I don't expect this performance in Arkham City.
 

Traumahound

Member
Jun 9, 2004
905
0
1,410
Canada
dr_rus said:
There is no "standard DirectX physics API". I'm sure they'd use it if someone would provide them with it. Until then it's better to have PhysX in there than nothing at all.

Really? I stand corrected then. A quick Google said there was one (or at least one "planned"). Guess it didn't make the cut.