Is TressFX a success?

Is TressFX a success?

  • Yes

    Votes: 98 62.4%

  • No

    Votes: 29 18.5%

  • Tress what?

    Votes: 30 19.1%
  • Total voters
    157
Seems to be something wrong with TressFX on my rig, looks like shit. It defies gravity and just constantly bounces and floats around with every step.
 
NickJames said:
Seems to be something wrong with TressFX on my rig, looks like shit. It defies gravity and just constantly bounces and floats around with every step.
Click to expand...

Same here, it's not just you. The physics/collision stuff is majorly fucked.
 
It still need a bit improvement. I don't think the collision detection is really working.
 
Seems to be pretty glitchy for me in TR, and has way too much of a performance hit.
If they drastically improve collision/performance, I can see it being a great addition to many games.
 
I just spent an hour playing Tomb Raider on a 7870 with normal settings and TessFX on at 2560x1440. The game looked really good.

I would call any graphic option a "success" if it improved the image quality and is still playable. The fact that I can play the game smoothly with it on at 2560x1440 is a very good thing.
 
We have no plans to use tress FX in our epic owned studio any time soon.

Also unreal engine 4 has it's own way of doing hair and fur if people need to use it most do not and would rather use the old shell poly texture and alpha channel method to help boost frame rates and maybe add simple cloth physics if they are using havok or animate it by hand.

Cloth physics are then added to the single poly and alpha hair texture clusters.

this has been done since like the 90's

Unreal engine 3 still does this if you could add your own hair code and plug in though like this new tressfx. that is changed for unreal engine 4 one of the improvements it has new ways of doing more advanced hair.

If you need good looking hair you break out the big guns though Nvida and ATI have hair code to generate hair on the GPU it is also used for grass.

Hair_03.jpg




Tress FX works good in tomb raider because everything is in a small space and slow pace and not to many characters are on the screen at time, it is even hurting some big bad PC's to turn it on you lose some frames.

since they are pushing the main character to be as real as possible I can see why they would be using this hair though even if it ruins frame rate. hardware is still not ready for real time rendering of that many hair it is like a low detail version of the way metal ray renders it and it takes hours to do it on a single machine.
 
Last edited:
It's a step in the right direction, needs more tweaking specially in crossfire mode, it flickers in some situations..
 
I would say yes, but it needs work.

Playing the game in crossfire/eyefinity produces some strange unintended effects.
 
jwcalla said:
would be nice if it gets open-sourced some day
Click to expand...

Any DX11 card can use TressFX and that's the beauty of it. Nvidia should quit on Physx although it has been announced for the new Witcher 3. Too bad for AMD users.
 
SpartanGR said:
Any DX11 card can use TressFX and that's the beauty of it. Nvidia should quit on Physx although it has been announced for the new Witcher 3. Too bad for AMD users.
Click to expand...

I'm in an alpha for Project Cars and PhysX 3.2 is only being run on the cpu so far. It runs pretty well in most situations, but when you turn on rain then the fps drop is very noticeable. But it is for the Intel + Nvidia users also so we all complain :) . Of course the game is in an alpha stage of development and we just got rain effects added in less than a month ago so it's not close to optimized. I don't fear PhysX running on the cpu. It's when they want to run effects only on Nvidia gpu that I have issues.
 
I guess at the moment, its just a tech demo. As others have mentioned, with the performance impact from just 1 character, its not viable to add something to the overall virtual world (as in everyone have the effect going on).

Games like Sims can benefit from it, lol. But we'll certainly need significantly more performance to have dozens of such hair being rendered at any given time.
 
SpartanGR said:
Any DX11 card can use TressFX and that's the beauty of it. Nvidia should quit on Physx although it has been announced for the new Witcher 3. Too bad for AMD users.
Click to expand...

Not all of us are on a DirectX platform though, hence my comment that it "would be nice if it gets open-sourced some day".
 
I kind of dont like it, it looks good when its just blowing in the wind or moving slowly but the spread is out of control and makes it look like shes flailing around. They need to adjust it so its more clingy like real hair. My guess is I will turn it off after the novelty wears off.
 
I seem to keep seeing the hair act like a hurricane hits it at the start of some cutscenes, then it flows back to normal. Not a huge issue, just strange to see the hair spaz out like that
 
idividebyzero said:
I kind of dont like it, it looks good when its just blowing in the wind or moving slowly but the spread is out of control and makes it look like shes flailing around. They need to adjust it so its more clingy like real hair. My guess is I will turn it off after the novelty wears off.
Click to expand...

That 99.% probabley wont happen since you need to add more compute cycles to the hair strands and self collisions/friction math and ad more of them and you would have no more framerate.

tressfx is already Very primitive compared to the way Mental ray 3d max maya and softimage physics systems does hair and they make powerful machines with workstation cards with 12gb Gddr5ram cry and you cant see all the detail in real time you have to wait for the final render.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeWisUaz3bE


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr35uGL8ouk
 
I like it. When its on its game, it looks awesome.

I will admit that it has its issues, mainly for me being that shadows seem off and that it sits above Lara's shoulders instead of on them, the effect is quite jarring and definitely suspends the reality of the situation. Frames: I take a hit too, like everyone, but it doesnt impact the game for me in any meaningful way [although I can definitely see how it would affect enjoyment for other users on single gpu's etc]

But overall, I definitely think as many have said it is a step in the right direction, and im excited to see how further advancements/refinements allow this technology to be implemented. Well done AMD/Crystal Dynamics.
 
sammyflinders said:
I like it. When its on its game, it looks awesome.

I will admit that it has its issues, mainly for me being that shadows seem off and that it sits above Lara's shoulders instead of on them, the effect is quite jarring and definitely suspends the reality of the situation.
Click to expand...

They patched Tomb Raider so her hair shouldn't hover over her shoulders.
 
I haven't played the game, so I can't comment. And I probably won't, but I think that any graphical advancements that are manufacturer-independent is good. "Success" is a subjective term, but we're definitely heading in the right direction. A company trying to make better, more realistic graphics and letting EVERYONE - including their competitors - participate? Win.
 
My experience has been before the patch but I didn't like the way the hair flowed looked very unnatural. So I just put it on high and was much happier with the way it looked.
 
Any proprietary software like this is an automatic failure. Game developers shouldn't have architecture specific add-ons like this because it's not in the best interest of the gamers.
 
bigdogchris said:
Any proprietary software like this is an automatic failure. Game developers shouldn't have architecture specific add-ons like this because it's not in the best interest of the gamers.
Click to expand...

Um last i checked it was running on both amd and nvidia cards:p and it'll also run on intel igp.................................
in 2025:D

But really though addons like tressfx are in the best interest of us gamers thanks to not being vendor specific.;)
 
Worth the performance hit. Well, rationally speaking, probably not. Exciting though! Can't wait to see where this is at in a few years (or maybe months with how quick technology moves).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top