AMD unveils TressFX Hair simulation technology

polonyc2 said:
will have to give Dirt Showdown a look...either way I'm glad to see AMD not making this a proprietary tech and am curious how it looks on Nvidia hardware

can they get TressFX to look like the red hair on that girl from the latest Pixar movie, Brave?...that was impressive

Click to expand...

That is Disney developed technology IIRC.

It's not design to do on real-time.
 
H-street said:
Lol!!

there is just no Pleasing today's PC Gamer :)


just makes me laugh.. a technology comes out that makes the graphics have a higher fidelity and all of a sudden its a bad thing.

Good thing 3dfx didn't come out today, they would have been run out the door with pitchforks.. how day they make the graphics look better..
Click to expand...

+1, TRUTH!
 
Looks pretty cool, but I want to see it in action. Also looks like you'll want to have AA applied. Hopefully this not only gives us realistic flowing hair, but also "moldable" hair that works properly under hats/helmets. Would be nice to be able to choose larger/longer hairstyles and not make your character bald when headgear is worn.

Lorien said:
He's also an epic douche lol
3qgaut.jpg
Click to expand...

Only half? Guess they toned things down in the second game.
 
Havok physics has also announced it's going GPU compute on PS4 and AMD hardware, so PhysX is nothing to write home about anymore, game wise anyway.

I'm sure both platforms will make use of it though.
 
Imagine if this was like Physx and required a separate hair card like way back in the day.
Eventually we would have breast cards for low gravity bounciness.
 
Dark12 said:
Imagine if this was like Physx and required a separate hair card like way back in the day.
Eventually we would have breast cards for low gravity bounciness.
Click to expand...

Yeah but considering the target market I suspect boobX cards would have sold extremely well.
 
Sooo.... we're THAT much closer to getting a game featuring Sean Connery's chest hair fighting off an alien invasion? AWESOME!
 
ooo....that would be cool...lol

or Colin Farrels arm hair...

lol
 
Cerulean said:
Won't ever play Tomb Raider (which I often just think of as "Boob Raider") because... will never happen :(
Click to expand...

Original Tomb Raider was an amazingly good game. Don't be deterred from her bountifulness. The game stood the test of time cause it was original, fun, and very well made. Can't say that for the resent Tomb Raider games made, but the first few were amazing.

If people played Tomb Raider just to see breasts, it wouldn't have lasted as long as it did. Also, this is what people saw on the Playstation or Sega Saturn versions. That requires a lot of imagination to fap to it.

Lara-Croft-triangle-tits1.jpeg


It's nothing like some other games, which only have sex appeal as their selling point.

lollipop-chainsaw-gdc-2012-7.jpg
 
Lorien said:
It never would've happened with Physx. Look at the PS3, do you see any games using GPU based physx there? No, all you get is Physx running on the SPUs because the GPU is far too weak.
Click to expand...

Its still runing physx
 
So what does this mean for her clothing? Will it get cut up and have threads that flutter in the wind to show us some underboob or what?
 
Last edited:
I'm just glad the in game character doesn't look like Hilary Swank unlike the marketing artwork.
 
Final Fantasy movie could do it... but with massive rendering power i assume... took AMD.. what 10 years to be able to do it?
 
I hope this is a step in the right direction to get more physics into AMD. I like them and I run their cards. The on Nvidia card I bought died on me, and then messed around with a friend after an RMA. Its not a good sample but I'd rather not pay 100s to find out if it will happen again. (for now)

However what kills me is that games use physx in a way that can't be completely removed, and when you turn it just about off it shows that the company just didn't care about the experience without it (lazy).

I'm trying to play Alice: Madness Returns with a i7 930 and 7870, I was doing find and the few places I saw physx it seemed nice so I bumped it up and it was fine... until I had to fight a few glob enemies then it took a dive, Well that was okay, until I had to fight a waves of them! The problem is that their, erm, globness sits on the ground, you walk through it, or it flys through the air, hits other things blah blah, physx all the way. Yeah no, not going to happen even at 1080p. So I turn it to low, go through the same area and it elements are there a static or reproduced they are just missing! This is unacceptable.

Also pictures for this is nice but the proof is going to be in video and data about the hit to performance. Right now all we have is one still versus another prettier still. Which is a nice hill of beans but nothing I can get excited over.
 
Ashbringer said:
Original Tomb Raider was an amazingly good game.

It's nothing like some other games, which only have sex appeal as their selling point.
Click to expand...


Did you actually play Lollypop Chainsaw? yeah I can say its no Bayonetta, nothing has been since. However you have to admit that the despite the game's shortcomings that it did have a pretty good story that would actually probably make an entertaining movie. Despite the fact that its "very Buffy"
 
MrGuvernment said:
Final Fantasy movie could do it... but with massive rendering power i assume... took AMD.. what 10 years to be able to do it?
Click to expand...

Back in 2001, it took 90 minutes to render a single frame of Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, on a "home-made" render farm.
 
Would I rather have TressFX hair or larger PhysX boobs. I think we all know the answer to that.
 
polonyc2 said:
this hair technology is perfect for Geralt from the Witcher games...Witcher 3 TressFX exclusive! :D
Click to expand...


Ignoring the exclusive thing, someone should send CDProjekt a message. This is exactly what Geralt needs for his badass long hair.

Anyway, this tech looks simply amazing in static screenshots. We need a moving picture however, to see how it behaves in action. Does it clip badly etc... Buuut even if it does, its still better than what we have now. Kudos to AMD for making it public. Proprietary garbage only ruins tech that could have possibly been good. (IE Physx)

Final Fantasy movie could do it... but with massive rendering power i assume... took AMD.. what 10 years to be able to do it?
Click to expand...

Final Fantasy Spirits Within is CGI, not real time rendering. See the above Pixar example. You cannot compare them to this. This tech has to happen on fly and react to whatever random thing happens. Power is irrelevant to CGI. Even if it takes 1 frame per hour to render or create, once its done its done and can be played back in full speed. Its all static video then.
 
Very cool tech. except most console gamers wont even see it. not because its not there, because they run through games like my old 81 escort ran through oil. I have watched my son play games (xbox) and he cares more about rankings and drinking enough mountain dew to kill an elephant, just for the stupid xp points than any thing else. I guess im old and just expect more out of a game than others.
But hey, at least those NPC's will have realistic flowing hair will they're saying "arrow in the knee" a million times.
 
cptnjarhead said:
Very cool tech. except most console gamers wont even see it. not because its not there, because they run through games like my old 81 escort ran through oil. I have watched my son play games (xbox) and he cares more about rankings and drinking enough mountain dew to kill an elephant, just for the stupid xp points than any thing else. I guess im old and just expect more out of a game than others.
But hey, at least those NPC's will have realistic flowing hair will they're saying "arrow in the knee" a million times.
Click to expand...

*ugh*. do we have to squeeze console inferiority into every thread? That's all about your son. People are all different. I, for example, grew up playing consoles, still play consoles (in addition to PC games) and average about 3 times as long to complete any given game; compared to what I observe to be the average for *insert game here*. and its because I love to explore around the game world, take screen shots, try to do things that stretch the limits of what's intended (climb around stuff, jump on stuff, get under stuff, etc) and stare at graphical assets.
 
chameleoneel said:
*ugh*. do we have to squeeze console inferiority into every thread? That's all about your son. People are all different. I, for example, grew up playing consoles, still play consoles (in addition to PC games) and average about 3 times as long to complete any given game; compared to what I observe to be the average for *insert game here*. and its because I love to explore around the game world, take screen shots, try to do things that stretch the limits of what's intended (climb around stuff, jump on stuff, get under stuff, etc) and stare at graphical assets.
Click to expand...

The premise of my post has nothing to do with console inferiority. Its not about consoles, its about the market they cater to.
Yes people are different, but all of my sons friends (20-25) are the same way, they buy a game and run through it, then go sell said game at game-stop for 10% of what they paid, so they can buy the next game. rinse wash repeat.
That is the demographic of today’s gamers. Console gamers dominate the game market and that is why most of today’s games are all about eye-candy and MMPOG. Most of today’s games are designed around a market that has ADD like tendencies. Movies are the same way. This eye-candy tech just adds more flashy stuff to keep their attention.

I too, take a long time with games, still playing skyrim 700+ hours. Thanks to CK and other peoples mods and DLC’s. Without the mods, it was good game that could have been awesome but not 700+ hrs awesome.
Same thing with GTA IV. Not as many mods but I still find myself walking around liberty watching people and looking at the architecture. Another good game that scratched the surface of what could have been prefect.
 
cptnjarhead said:
The premise of my post has nothing to do with console inferiority. Its not about consoles, its about the market they cater to.
Yes people are different, but all of my sons friends (20-25) are the same way, they buy a game and run through it, then go sell said game at game-stop for 10% of what they paid, so they can buy the next game. rinse wash repeat.
That is the demographic of today’s gamers. Console gamers dominate the game market and that is why most of today’s games are all about eye-candy and MMPOG. Most of today’s games are designed around a market that has ADD like tendencies. Movies are the same way. This eye-candy tech just adds more flashy stuff to keep their attention.

I too, take a long time with games, still playing skyrim 700+ hours. Thanks to CK and other peoples mods and DLC’s. Without the mods, it was good game that could have been awesome but not 700+ hrs awesome.
Same thing with GTA IV. Not as many mods but I still find myself walking around liberty watching people and looking at the architecture. Another good game that scratched the surface of what could have been prefect.
Click to expand...

And this has what to do with hair physics/rendering? :rolleyes:
 
face2palm said:
And this has what to do with hair physics/rendering? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

absolutely nothing.

speaking of physics though, i had a physX card and i really thought that was the shizzle, when i played ghost recon.
 
Is there video of this? I tried searching but I found some russian dude with long hair talking about the screenshots... he didn't even shake his head to give me an idea of wth it might look like... I'm very sad
 
bigstusexy said:
Did you actually play Lollypop Chainsaw? yeah I can say its no Bayonetta, nothing has been since. However you have to admit that the despite the game's shortcomings that it did have a pretty good story that would actually probably make an entertaining movie. Despite the fact that its "very Buffy"
Click to expand...

You don't "play" Lollypop Chainsaw, you LIVE it.
 
Just tried Tomb Raider and I was hoping TressFX works on 680 gtx lol. It's unplayable with it enabled... worth a shot though.. granted I only used the surround resolution 5760x1080. I'll try lowering the solution or just using 1 monitor with 1080 res.

Edit: tested other resolution
 
Last edited:
For the Nvidia guys remember to get the new Beta drivers that came out today. They aren't perfect, but they almost doubled a guy's fps in the Tomb raider thread in the PC Gaming section.
 
Played TombRaider today, the TressFX has all sorts of graphical problems when running in quadfire. To the surprise of nobody I should add.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top