NVIDIA Demonstrates Turf Effects

And there goes all the GPU power... Only works for Minecraft :p
 
If it's not some exclusive garbage and not taxing on GPUs....sweet. That would add a lot of fun to some RPGs & open world PVP games.

I want to see the path some big ass monster leaves in the grass, would be great for skyrim, if the AI wasn't based on the Doom monsters.
 
leSLIe said:
And there goes all the GPU power... Only works for Minecraft :p
Click to expand...

Actually, grass is cheap, since you basically have one texture you copy a couple thousand times. Under the current way things are done, copies are REALLY cheap to perform.

You killed killed doing the shadowing more then anything else; that's where performance dies. The actual rendering of the grass is really, really cheap.
 
can it simulate realistic weed effects as well?...can't wait to see the first marijuana field simulator
 
The grass' movement is off because they treated each blade like it had it's own weather. Really strange when you consider that a field of equal length grass will move nearly identically which might be easier to light and shade. What I really wanted to see was a gust of wind travel across a field. That would be a coo affect. Then you could use grass to judge where your bullet/arrow/golf ball was going to land!
 
1million blades in 1 millisecond with "nothing more" than a GTX 680? I know for the average [H] users that's fine, but for the vast majority out there...
 
shad0w4life said:
If it's not some exclusive garbage and not taxing on GPUs....sweet. That would add a lot of fun to some RPGsMantln world PVP games.

I want to see the path some big ass monster leaves in the grass, would be great for skyrim, if the AI wasn't based on the Doom monsters.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Nvidia doesn't exist as a company just to do AMD's homework for them. Both companies are guilty of "proprietary garbage". I bet you don't cry for Nvidia owners that they cant use Mantle, just a hunch.

Anyhoo, look forward to seeing this in future titles.
 
"Proprietary Garbage" moved both OGL and DX forward over the years. Remember SM 2.0, that every game needed for years? That came about because both NVIDIA and AMD implemented their own independent Shader Models back in the day (1.1 and 1.4). MSFT simply unified the two, and we've had unified shaders for AMD/NVIDIA every since.
 
Hmm, doesn't TressFX 2.0 also handle grass? With TressFX being open, makes proprietary turf moot...
 
Lawnmower Simulator 2016 here we come!

But seriously, did it really need dynamic lighting? It's not like we're doing Honey I Shrunk The Kids gameplay.
 
Perhaps the end of flat grass textures and inter-spliced cardboard cut-outs of tufts, all for it.
 
It just doesn't look right. But regardless, suddenly all my games need grass. Waiting for Grass 2.0
 
NVIDIA Turf Effects is a new NVIDIA GameWorks technology that empowers users to simulate and render massive grass simulation with physical interaction. Our grass technology provides a fully geometrical representation. Grass blades can be represented with a resolution as low as three triangles to several 100 triangles per blade by using continuous level of detail. This allows millions of grass blades to be simulated.
Click to expand...

This reads like a bad April Fools joke.
 
DPI said:
I'm pretty sure Nvidia doesn't exist as a company just to do AMD's homework for them. Both companies are guilty of "proprietary garbage". I bet you don't cry for Nvidia owners that they cant use Mantle, just a hunch.
Click to expand...
Lately, AMD's been a lot more open. As for Mantle while it's true that it's in their camp for now, they've publicly stated they plan to open it up so both Intel and Nvidia can implement if they want, saying that it was designed to work with modern GPUs, not specifically AMD ones (though I'm sure they have a home advantage). Also with Freesync, they worked to make that a standard with Displayport 1.3, so it won't be something that's inherently tied to AMD either.

The only recent proprietary stuff I can think of on their end is MLAA, Adaptive AA, and going way back, Truform.
 
Ocean said:
I would rather have nice trees.
Click to expand...

Yes. Trees are hard to do in game to where they look decent. Far away, sure. Get closer, and they are flat and look like ass compared to everything else. Get grass going, trees, water, and ground textures, and things will come together perfect.

One thing that did extremely well with ground textures, though (and trees) - Vanishing of Ethan Carter.
 
Is it too much to expect the grassblades to not bisect each other? Because meh.. looks wrong.
 
tetris42 said:
Lately, AMD's been a lot more open. As for Mantle while it's true that it's in their camp for now, they've publicly stated they plan to open it up so both Intel and Nvidia can implement if they want, saying that it was designed to work with modern GPUs, not specifically AMD ones (though I'm sure they have a home advantage). Also with Freesync, they worked to make that a standard with Displayport 1.3, so it won't be something that's inherently tied to AMD either.

The only recent proprietary stuff I can think of on their end is MLAA, Adaptive AA, and going way back, Truform.
Click to expand...

It's just as proprietary. They are just not as transparent about it.

For both implementations to work, it requires some very specific hardware features that are found on AMD hardware. When AMD says its open, they mean it will run on Nvidia hardware..... if Nvidia hardware was GCN.

Freesync is even more proprietary than most nvidia implementations proprietary stuff. Not only does it require GCN, it requires bonaire or newer GCN. Tahiti or pitcairns cards. Atleast gsync works on all keplar cards and maxwell cards.
 
Damn, technology like this makes me miss the Stalker series even more...
 
That just doesn't look right. Medium length grass typically does stay bent over like that, it'll pop back up unless it's extremely dry. If I stuck my face into a patch of grass, it's not going to flatten it out like it did in that video.

Apparently the physics guys at Nvidia don't go outside very often.
 
tajoh111 said:
For both implementations to work, it requires some very specific hardware features that are found on AMD hardware. When AMD says its open, they mean it will run on Nvidia hardware..... if Nvidia hardware was GCN.
Click to expand...
That was an initial miscommunication, that's not accurate, it will support Nvidia cards:
http://wccftech.com/amd-mantle-api-require-gcn-work-nvidia-graphic-cards/

Freesync is even more proprietary than most nvidia implementations proprietary stuff. Not only does it require GCN, it requires bonaire or newer GCN. Tahiti or pitcairns cards. Atleast gsync works on all keplar cards and maxwell cards.
Click to expand...
I think the way you put that is misleading because it doesn't "require" GCN, those are just the cards that currently support it. They made the spec open and a standard of Displayport, so other manufacturers are free to use the spec for their cards also. In other words, nothing is stopping future cards from Nvidia or Intel or whoever from using the spec and there's no licensing fee to pay, hence open.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to pick sides (I'm on an Nvidia card since they simply have more AA options), but I think claiming AMD is just as proprietary simply isn't true nowadays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top