Ah ok that makes sense
-
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
Ah ok that makes sense
InfiniteUnrest
Member
PhysX doesn't support AMD GPUs is the issue, it's exclusive to NVidia GPU. There are CPU drivers for it, but it doesn't perform as well over CPU as over GPU.
If Havoc is removed as an option, that would present an interesting scenario, but in future gens they could always go NVidia/PhysX.
Well I don't know if you're familiar with physics middleware culture (I'm an expert)......
hydragonwarrior
Member
Sooner or later, every game will be helping Microsoft. Gahaha
justgames7604
Member
As am I. Continue with the lesson though.
We'll give you Havok if you don't buy AMD.
GeordieMark
Member
This acquisition is obviously with HoloLens in mind, not gaming. The nature of HoloLens means it needs pretty a sophisticated physics engine. MS bought Havok with this in mind.
D
Deleted member 125677
Unconfirmed Member
Sounds like a smart purchase! Havok is everywhere, money should be poring in
JeffG
Member
Yea...this line in the Microsoft Blog pinpoints that use exactly
Microsoft Blog said:
Alx
Member
As a matter of fact I don't see a direct correlation between AR and a physics engine. Hololens is a matter of environment perception and object rendering, but you don't necessarily need to have realistic physics for the fake objects added in the real scene. No more than for regular software anyway.
Or maybe I'm missing something ?
The CPU physx workes the same as havoc does. Tons of games use physx that wayacross pc and consoles. Hardware accelerated physx is a separate thing for NVidia GPUs.
No, it's not.
Euphoria is a character animation system, driven through complex behaviours & simulation. It is not a physics system in any shape or form, and takes input from whatever physics engine the game is using (e.g. Force Unleashed used Havok for its core physics simulation, along with Euphoria & DMM).
In games, the "physics engine" is typically what simulates collisions, ragdolls, physical movement like "push everything in a sphere out by 2m/s like a explosion occurred" etc.
OmegaDL50
Member
One of the main tools use for PS4 game development is called Visual Studio. Guess who owns Visual Studio.
In short Microsoft owning Havok will has no significant impact in the scope of things.
GameWhisperer
Banned
Sounds like wishful thinking on his part that's not really grounded in reality.
Flying Toaster
Member
Minus the end of times this does not surprise me. Intel went on an IP buying spree in early 2000 and honestly I have no idea why they were snapping up companies left and right.
Oh noes...
But on a serious note this should be a wait and see approach.
Oh noes...
But on a serious note this should be a wait and see approach.
gaming_noob
Member
MS gearing up for next gen.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
All that need to be said
OdysseusVA
Banned
Indeed
With the cloud being powered by Havok and low-level async compute in DX12 for the Xbone, I expect games to be 1080p/60 from here on out.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Summat telemetry money put to work.
PlayStation already uses "PlayReady" which if you go to a certain PS4 system setting you'll find out it's by Microsoft.
Serious question, how is Havok compared to Bullet physics library?
dragonbane
Member
I know Beyond on the PS3 used it. A lot of games do, but it isnt really in the foreground or mentioned often for games.
This guy clearly has a few screws loose. It's one thing to be passionate about a brand, it's another to distort the truth on a constant basis.
I pity him really.
Not in this case, too much passive aggressive coming from me.
GreyOcelot
Member
Wait wait wait. Do people actually think MS isn't going to license this to everyone?
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Why do people think MS won't licence it to PlayStation games?
If they don't they have to deny 3rd parties it too for PS4 versions and 3rd parties would just go elsewhere because it would cost them more to license two middlewares when they can just licenced one.
Havok would be dead in a year.
If they don't they have to deny 3rd parties it too for PS4 versions and 3rd parties would just go elsewhere because it would cost them more to license two middlewares when they can just licenced one.
Havok would be dead in a year.
tattooed_dwarf
Member
Great thread title, really captures the feel of this discussion, heh!
Good purchase for MS, licensing makes them money, more than denying it from Sony because console warz. It's business guys.
Good purchase for MS, licensing makes them money, more than denying it from Sony because console warz. It's business guys.
RodrigoDorta
Member
i did not know that. You know what physics engine GTA IV use? i though "euphoria" was the physics engine and "morpheme" the procedural animation solution which integrates into the physics.
Edit: also DMM was pretty cool, especialy the wood materials generating splinters and such
GravityInsanity
Member
PeregrinSe7en
Member
although I expect the same as everyone elese... i still don't put anything past Microsoft.
If Microsoft is really all about making money, then they should be working on a Minecraft title for PlayStation VR...like the one they are releasing for Oculus for PC.
I mean it's not like they have their own competing device releasing anytime soon....riiiight?
Okay, so, Microsoft owns Havok now, and nVidia owns PhyX. Is Sony going to have to make their own physics engines for every game now, or is there another engine out there I don't know about?
Pardon if somebody asked/answered this already.
PS: I don't doubt that Microsoft will let Sony use the engine if they pay the licensing fee. However I'm not sure Sony is going to want to give their competitor any more money then they have to. So if they want to avoid paying Microsoft a fee, what's their best bet?
Pardon if somebody asked/answered this already.
PS: I don't doubt that Microsoft will let Sony use the engine if they pay the licensing fee. However I'm not sure Sony is going to want to give their competitor any more money then they have to. So if they want to avoid paying Microsoft a fee, what's their best bet?
dragonbane
Member
hahaha
Oh god, I cant. Last Guardian is dead again guys. Ms found a way lmao
GameSeeker
Member
The issue for Sony and Nintendo will not be licensing. Microsoft will continue to license Havok to existing parties.
The real issue will be one of early development access. If Havok was still owned by Intel, Sony would send very early PS5 dev kits to Havok to ensure Havok was ready to go Day 1 of next gen PS5 console launch. With Havok being owned by Microsoft, Sony will have to be more careful about providing early dev kits to Havok/Microsoft that could reveal too much competitive information too soon.
The real issue will be one of early development access. If Havok was still owned by Intel, Sony would send very early PS5 dev kits to Havok to ensure Havok was ready to go Day 1 of next gen PS5 console launch. With Havok being owned by Microsoft, Sony will have to be more careful about providing early dev kits to Havok/Microsoft that could reveal too much competitive information too soon.
GreyOcelot
Member
Except they won't deny it to Sony. This is a company that makes money off of every android phone sold. They make software for Mac, etc etc etc. They've actually been moving closer and closer to platform agnosticism since satya took over. There isn't a chance in hell they'll turn down a licensing deal, just like there isn't a chance in hell they wouldn't support minecraft out on every possible platform. That's almost always been MSs MO throughout there history (other than some of the late balmer years)
Dreamgazer
Member
The thread title is really misleading.
There's honestly not enough entertaining mental breakdowns in here.
There's honestly not enough entertaining mental breakdowns in here.
Futurematic
Member
Wall St does not like--to put it mildly--big successful slow growth corporations: no money to be made off of them. Microsoft is another obvious example, if you look at their share price vs how much money they make; the markets are predicting the future (lol) with the share price, which is stagnant since they don't see any big growth ahead.
Intel's buying spree was, it looks like, to a) clear out some cash, b) hope that something they picked up exploded in value. Also Intel had a bit of a rocky period in terms of management and engineering around the turn of the century, so it is possible they were just flailing around. That said I don't know modern Intel like I do old Intel so who knows? Perhaps they had a grand strategy involving a Havok hardware accelerator built into their CPUs.
OmegaDL50
Member
No.
It just means Microsoft will license it out for other companies to use.
Just like how Microsoft licenses out the usage for Visual Studio for PS4 development and debugging, or that Plugin for Unity Engine.
Ownership of the software will change, but the usage will remain the same.
As a I said in the my first post in this thread. Microsoft thinks in business to make money by additional means, not in fanboy rationalities with limited scope.
Yes. it seems that way. Unbelievable. They will just use it to make money off of, not licensing this out would be the worst financial decision ever. They make more money by licensing it than to make anything exclusive.
semiconscious
Gold Member
this. musta come in too late
...ot: now this makes sense for ms. even if they themselves eventually bail on consoles
...