Crazyorloco
Member
Don't the grand theft auto games use havok?
-
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.
Microsoft buys Havok from Intel, GAFfers tear skin off while screaming about endtimes
- Thread starter gofreak
- Start date
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
I don't think Microsoft will stop licensing it but if there is any developer that hates giving Microsoft money they need to find another solution.
capitalCORN
Member
Microsoft are Entropy, they have no ones best interest in mind. Games are FUCKED.
I think that's pretty clear.
They'll absolutely combine Havok with Azure to get could based physics for the future. Crackdown is just the beginning.
R* created their own engine RAGE iirc.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
What is next? I can see them buy Unity, can you? I doubt they will go after another hardware company soon after what happened with Nokia.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I really doubt any relevant developer will stop using havok because it's giving money to MS.
So, linux game developers.
There is already other third party physics engines.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Are you serious with this?
Always-honest
Banned
It means no Last Guardian
PhysX is probably the next most popular and is also multiplatform
Mysterious
Banned
Netherscourge
Banned
Would Microsoft consider embedding Havok into it's DirectX API and focus more on pushing exclusive DX12 support, as opposed to just Havok standalone licensing?
Because, that would be interesting and very aggressive by them.
Because, that would be interesting and very aggressive by them.
Why do people think developers will simply stop using Havok simply because MS owns it? As long as it does what's intended, is easy to use, and is affordable, developers will stick with it... That goes for Sony, Nintendo, and anyone else...
And MS isn't going to hold Havok ransom... This is just one of many products they license to competitions...
And MS isn't going to hold Havok ransom... This is just one of many products they license to competitions...
Remember the outcry when the Euphoria makers were bought by Rovio, I think?
Could have at least waited until an Xbox fanatic praised the news. Falls kind of flat when the punchline comes before the setup.
SplitYourInfinities
Member
Don't worry guys, this won't change anything (other than MS earning some money from licensing).
Microsoft frequently tries to acquire large gaming propreties?
EatinOlives
Member
Of course they're going to license it to other developers. Havok is so successful because it's ubiquitous in modern gaming, so it would make little sense for Microsoft to actively deny money.
In this thread: posters who don't understand jokes.
Unless you have an AMD chipset, then you can't run PhysX on it. You'll have to run it on your CPU.
protomouse
Member
Microsoft stealing our engines! /s
I think this is great for the future of Havok.
I think this is great for the future of Havok.
Okay I'm updating the OP again since people seem confused as to what Havok is (and isn't).
As a note, here's a list of their products:
People who use the Euphoria animation system might still use Havok Destruction or Havok AI for example.
DICE and Naughty Dog use Havok Destruction for example, whereas Pro Evo uses Havok Cloth.
As a note, here's a list of their products:
People who use the Euphoria animation system might still use Havok Destruction or Havok AI for example.
DICE and Naughty Dog use Havok Destruction for example, whereas Pro Evo uses Havok Cloth.
I basically asked the same question. I dont see why not.
That doesnt mean im "tearing my skin off" like the passive aggressive topic name entails. As long as i get a proper sequel to the original Red Faction im good.
Jinfash
needs 2 extra inches
ProvenDeadly
Member
So Neil Druckman is making a game that is putting money in Microsofts pockets.
Phat Michael
Banned
They succeeded in this one?
ProvenDeadly
Member
Because of this I predict the Xbox to be the only gaming platform available by the year 2020. All PS4s will be banned and owning one will be illegal.
Damn you Phil Spencer.
Damn you Phil Spencer.
I love how some people think the console wars actually mean anything beyond forums and PR.
These are billion dollar companies who pull in a lot of money, they work together ALL the time. The amount of products that use each others licenses and pieces of hardware is pretty large.
In the end nothing will change, MS won't be "Sorry Sony you can't have this because of your PS4", they will continue to license to whomever wants it and continue to make money off of it. They will however integrate it into their Cloud tech as stated, this is more than just making license money, but that will still continue as long as its profitable, which is what these companies care about in the end.
These are billion dollar companies who pull in a lot of money, they work together ALL the time. The amount of products that use each others licenses and pieces of hardware is pretty large.
In the end nothing will change, MS won't be "Sorry Sony you can't have this because of your PS4", they will continue to license to whomever wants it and continue to make money off of it. They will however integrate it into their Cloud tech as stated, this is more than just making license money, but that will still continue as long as its profitable, which is what these companies care about in the end.
Yeah and Sony makes money with each Blu-Ray drive on Xbox One.
hobblygobbly
Member
Nah (speaking as a programmer myself), there's no sense in incorporating Havok into the DirectX API. DirectX provides rendering capabilities (or multimedia rather), Havok provides physics. In-house engines license things like Havok and incorporate the engine/library into their game engine. Game engines have a whole bunch of middleware and/or in-house stuff, some make their own physics engines, some prefer to license one out and incoporate. Engines use rendering APIs like DirectX or OpenGL for in the simplest explanation - graphics/multimedia. There's no sense in incorporating that into DirectX, architecturally it doesn't make sense. Physics engines/libraries are incorporated into existing engines. There's plenty of third party middleware that is licensed, Havok is just another one of them. For example, a lot of games license Scaleform from Autodesk which is commonly used in user interfaces, this middleware is incorporated into the engine. Same goes with audio middleware such as FMOD. You also get more gameplay related middleware such as PathEngine for pathfinding that some games use instead of writing their own. Basically, architecturally and from a very technical programming standpoint, it's a bad idea to incorporate a physics engine into a graphics API because it doesn't make sense and is unnecessary maintainability.
They /could/ say you can only use Havok if you use DirectX 12 as a licensing term, but actual implementation into the DirectX API makes no sense on a technical level. They could also make their own game engine like Unity or Unreal esque and stop licensing and incorporate Havok into the engine for example. However I don't see Microsoft making their own engine, they abandoned XNA game framework a long time ago too, I'd expect them to buy a tech company like Unity instead. Regardless, I just think they want Havok for licensing money and Intel probably no longer wanted to maintain and improve it.
Was wondering what the hell Havok was until I saw the logo on the first page. I see that damn logo in pretty much all of my games.
Of course they will. The only reason they shut up was because they had nothing substantial to show. Sure there's Forza drivatars, Titanfall AI or even Halo 5 warzone, but those are minuscule things really compared to what can be done.
Once Crackdown beta is available next year for people to test, all you're gonna hear is cloud this cloud that from them I bet. It's a potentially game changing feature and the first "next gen" thing we've seen so far... I wouldn't put my money on them not hyping it up.
Of course they will. The only reason they shut up was because they had nothing substantial to show. Sure there's Forza drivatars, Titanfall AI or even Halo 5 warzone, but those are minuscule things really compared to what can be done.
Once Crackdown beta is available next year for people to test, all you're gonna hear is cloud this cloud that from them I bet. It's a potentially game changing feature and the first "next gen" thing we've seen so far... I wouldn't put my money on them not hyping it up.
rakkadakka
Member
Microsoft is the Bad Guy TM
The worst thing they do might keep some in house advancements for themselves but I highly doubt they'll just stop doing profitable deals with other vendors.
BleedOrange
Banned
U4 is undoubtedly going to put money in a lot of people's pockets.
ProvenDeadly
Member
It's just funny how everyone is competing but in reality everyone is just a part of a larger money making machine. MS because of this + Minecraft on PS systems.
JeffG
Member
I'm sure they will like the money, but the driver for the purchase would be control.
Sounds like they want to use it for cloud based physics. Either they had to create an engine from scratch or acquire one. (if they just licensed it themselves, they wouldn't be able to control the direction of any future development of the engine.)
Holy crap guys, Sony doesn't own bluray. They are on the bluray association, which Microsoft is now on too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Association
InsaneTiger
Member
I think if MS were to purchase AMD, it would eventually be a write off.