PhysX is a physics framework, this has nothing to do with Unreal 3, and this kind of fluid effect *is not possible* in Unreal 3 out of the box. It's causing all manner of problems with people referencing this video and asking how to do it in UDK on a fairly regular basis.
UDK uses the PhysX physics engine and has some minor support for some hardware accelerated features.
This is also Ageia's proprioetary renderer. This video has nothing to do with Nvidia and predates the acquisition by quite a long time. If it's any 'engine', it's the same as the original Cell Factor.
i saw this back in 07 when it came out, and i was thinking wow the video games are gonna be realistic in a few years. I havent seen that tho in any video game yet so im wondering what happened?
Very good but not scary... How many GOOD games are dedicated to Nvidia Physx... Not much, i have to admit that it´s great, but last Year the only GAme where i really miss it was Batman: Arkham Asylum. AMD ROCKS !!!
Wow looks like it's a physx test not ue3. And besides pieeater8822 the ps3 has a gpu and the chip is called a reality synthisyzer. So I think it's kinda gears towards physics. Like fat princess. It uses physx by nvidia so I dont see were your getting the whole ps3 can't handle it. And on top of that it has an 8 core processor each running at around 3.2 ghz each per core. So I call shenanigans on you input for the ps3
@dadio46 PS3 has 1 core what the hell are you talking about? PhysX utilizes OpenGL, and DirectX, neither of which the PS3 uses. PhysX is also very poorly optimized for CPU, it made for GPU, PS3's GPU struggles at is it, PhysX which can even make higher end PC GPU's bottleneck a little bit, would crash the PS3.
@PuLsE0o0 It is not an 8 core processor. It has a single core, supported by 7 vector processors (with an 8th on standby in case 1 of those 7 fails). Would you class your computer as dual core if it had a single core supported by a maths co-processor? No, of course you wouldn't. The ps3 also doesn't use directx, I have literally no idea from where you pulled that utter tripe. Now, stop lying to people and go do some reading, you're making everyone ignorant.
"I didn't say that that the PS3 didn't use DirectX"
I know, you said that the PS3 DOES use Directx, that's why I corrected you by saying that it doesn't. Not only were you wrong again, but it's kind of Ironic that someone who has been incorrect in everything they've said so far has (wrongly) accused me of getting something wrong. Seriously, read about stuff before you try to correct people, you'll look far less silly if you do.
Seriously, what are you, 12? You're getting butthurt because I didn't compliment you on acknowledging that I was right about something that's just common sense. There was no mix up, you were talking a whole bunch of shit about something you clearly knew nothing about. If you consider someone losing their patience with someone who is reading sentences as the oppisite of what they clearly state "trolling" then wow, you really are a tool. Seriously, read a goddamn book.
@PuLsE0o0 Yes, I made one typo, (an actual mistake, ie a slight momentary slip of the finger), you on the other hand were waffling utter horse shit about hardware out of sheer ignorance. Oh, and if YOU'RE* going to try and lecture about spelling and grammar standards:
"it's" = "It is" (contraction, not possessive.)
"your" = "belonging to you" (possessive),
If you can't work out where "it's" and "its" should go, then seriously, go back back to school.
@PuLsE0o0 "You still think I purposefully gave out incorrect information?"
No, I don't, In fact I've repeatedly pointed out that you were obviously just too damn lazy/dull/arrogant in your assumption of being correct to actually fact check what you were saying at the time. If you were being deliberately misleading, that would at least indicate intelligence.
Also, calling me stupid then saying "I am leaving on a neutral note" is some full retard shit son.
@PuLsE0o0 Haha, wow, looks like I hit a nerve there. the "full retard son" was actually a reference to a film called tropic thunder, I think you must of read into it a little bit too far judging from your reaction...
And again, repeatedly calling me stupid is not "neutral", I'm open about the fact that I think you're dumb, you're such a hypocrite that you're using all the same slurs and are acting as if you're somehow being totally passive. Fail.
Yes, highlighting the fact that you outlined your own hypocrisy and butthurt is really "dulling down". When somebodies comment essentially consists of "You're stupid, I'm being neutral" then they are very much in full retard mode.
I must say, declaring some kind of obtuse superiority as you make your leave is a GREAT point of argument.
Seriously, stay in school, maybe for another couple of decades.
@PuLsE0o0 "I am not trying to declare superiority over you" "I am anything but dumb" "you seem to have the minimum IQ level required for living"
Seriously, this is just getting too easy now.
Are you seriously trying to tell me you make straight A's in English when you can't even tell where "your" and "you're" should be applied? Yeah, I'm not buying that, students get marked down for displaying poor writing skill, which you definitely do.
@PuLsE0o0 "I do on the internet because I am not judged as harshly so I don't really care"
So, you use grammatical rules completely the wrong way round because it's easier? Yeah, I'm not buying that...
"if you didn't feel intimidated by my comments then you would have stopped commenting" I keep commenting because you keep responding and making hilariously stupid assertions and half baked excuses. I could easily say that YOUR continued response indicates intimidation too, genius...
@PuLsE0o0 "I was confused on the fact it had 8 SPEs(Do you know what this is?)"
Right, so now you're asking the guy who had to correct you about the PS3 if he knows about the structure of the processing system he specifically had to correct you about.
@PuLsE0o0 "Your (sic) ignoring the question say it, what is an SPE?"
Frankly I'm just still processing what a fucking stupid question that is. I actually explained what SPE's are and what they do when I corrected your statement that the ps3 had "8 cores". Seeing as you apparently can't remember anything for yourself, I guess I'll have to repeat the fact that they are RISC units that process simple instructions, taking load off the CPU and increasing bandwidth. Seriously, wtf is wrong with you?
II) I don't know what you were expecting there, my first comment specifically explained why "cpu + 7 active SPE's + 1 backup does not = 8 core processor". I actually pre-emptively answered it. Again, seriously, are you that dumb that you have to ask something that I already explained to you, or is your memory just THAT bad?
@pamew Actually, the 8th core is not in standby in case 1 of the 7 fails, the 8th is permanently disabled to increase chip yields.
As at the time the fab process probably had a pretty high failure rate they would let 1 core be broken to sell the chip, it is basically binning except these is only 1 model so they chose to let 1 go.
Since Sony has absolutely no idea whether a given 8th core in a PS3 works it cannot be reserved.
@pixphi I was asked what an SPE is in general, (hence referring to the unit, not the console it happens to appear in, amongst other applications) in the case of the PS3 there's yet another locked out purely for the OS to use, so that leaves 6 for actual games. It's still immensely powerful when programmed for properly, although apparently everyone outside of Sony considers this too "complex" for game work, which is a shame, as it's a great platform, IMO.
@pixphi "You can say the PS3 is immensely powerful"
Yes, when programmed for properly.
"I could just as easily say a 5870 with 1600 SP's and a hugely wide 5-SP pipeline is even more powerful."
I should hope so, it's newer tech. And again, kickass if you can get it to do what you want. Folding@home comes to mind for a cool use of all that power, (and a very constructive one too).
looks like a mercury leak... XD awsome by the way i thought that any game had that... it would be awsome to work a bit on it and make smaller particles to make it more real, but would be wourst for the computer
@ernis1100 it is realtime, just running on a powerfull PC, that is why we dont see things like this in games, the engine can do it IF you have the hardware to run it.
Well actually you could download the udk and compile a quick map you make with all the props you want to build with or something. A physgun is included I believe, as is multiplayer. As for a gmod?
The unreal engine doesn't have this yet, these two tech demos rendered really slowly using Ageia PhysX, these both took hours to be rendered in the unreal engine, this is not game footage...
@videoGunZ yeah it looks like they were using a super computer to run that, but again ive never seen any games even today that use that kind of water physics or even destruction physics
like... bad company 2? their destruction is pre determined and their stuff usually just pops out of existance instead having real applied physics
@yellowfellow once upon a time... naaw bad beginning of a sentence :D
some time ago, i tried to build maps for ut2004 with complete destructible buildings: every stone in a wall was a physical object! so if the wall is standing normally, you got normal fps too. but if you shoot it, your fps are falling same way like the wall :/ physics arent that easy for your pc :)
@yellowfellow consoles stole the limelight from pcs and along with that the tech that is ever evolving just vanished, ie. physics. its really fucking dumb i tell you, nowadays its all about wowing the dumbass 12 yr old consumers and making a quick buck on a game...
@lilHamminator You mean, MW2? Like how they yoinked away all the features PC users loved it for, then sold a billion copies of it anyhow? Yeah, that's the fuckin' reason I don't own a single console. They stagnate the FUCK out of technology, and I had my fill of that back with the PS2.
they show us ridiculous demos of calculations that you need super computer to run, and when the final games come out they just say, well its your fault cause our engine can actually do this
@yellowfellow That is up to the developers to decide whether or not they want to use it. The features are there. Download UDK and take a look for yourself...
it looks better then the crytech fluid effect but i would guess that that takes up alot more cpu/mem stuff as crytech's crysis one just kinda left a decal on the ground for a lil wile insted of having it be an actual object that stays and pushes shit around they might have made a new one for a coming up game tho duno
Well I gess it isent so eazy to make a liquid mesh.
SwedishEpicTime 2 weeks ago
This is Physx.. not Unreal Engine!
dethskullcrusher 4 months ago
@dethskullcrusher well physix is just physic solver unreal engine is used to render image itself
piroman665 4 months ago
Comment removed
dethskullcrusher 4 months ago
This is NOT the Unreal Engine. This is Ageia's proprietary rendering engine.
ambershee 5 months ago
@ambershee PhysX isn't a renderer. And Ageia is now nVidia.
Though the title of the video is TECHNICALLY not correct, it's really an honest mistake since PhysX comes in the UDK package.
PikkaBird 2 months ago
@PikkaBird
PhysX is a physics framework, this has nothing to do with Unreal 3, and this kind of fluid effect *is not possible* in Unreal 3 out of the box. It's causing all manner of problems with people referencing this video and asking how to do it in UDK on a fairly regular basis.
UDK uses the PhysX physics engine and has some minor support for some hardware accelerated features.
ambershee 2 months ago
@PikkaBird.
This is also Ageia's proprioetary renderer. This video has nothing to do with Nvidia and predates the acquisition by quite a long time. If it's any 'engine', it's the same as the original Cell Factor.
ambershee 2 months ago
now swim in it
shaun03a 5 months ago
that's so unrealistic
matthew47ak 5 months ago
...but it costs way too much.UDK is free
D3IMUDD4 6 months ago
@D3IMUDD4 now cryengine 3 is free
blingdog15 2 months ago
I think the Crytek engine is better (its the graphic engine of Crysis)
VampireFreaXXTR 6 months ago
crengine is still better in my opinion
SultanaKidStudios 7 months ago
Wonder when fluids will start looking like water and not like vomit with bits of half-digested food in it.
3zzzTyle 7 months ago
@3zzzTyle looks more like oil to me
patricpelto 5 months ago
hmm so this is the eng that's gonna run MAss effect 3.
red25ty 7 months ago
this is not unreal engine 3 :\
Sergeeeek 7 months ago 34
How do you get Unreal Engine 3? Please respond because on the website you need to be a major developer in order to get it
unexpectedvids 8 months ago
@unexpectedvids Just download the UDK at their homepage. (google UDK) - Its free
GermanPlaystation 8 months ago
@GermanPlaystation tk :) is it like souce sdk cuz im used to that
unexpectedvids 8 months ago
wow
Tural192 8 months ago
i saw this back in 07 when it came out, and i was thinking wow the video games are gonna be realistic in a few years. I havent seen that tho in any video game yet so im wondering what happened?
jeremyc311709 9 months ago
@jeremyc311709
Uh-oh, it seems that realtime need another few years to get up at render standards.
KenseyQuarantine 9 months ago
someone spilled the sh*t
xy274 10 months ago
That's 1 big function..
luniarxox 10 months ago
Very good but not scary... How many GOOD games are dedicated to Nvidia Physx... Not much, i have to admit that it´s great, but last Year the only GAme where i really miss it was Batman: Arkham Asylum. AMD ROCKS !!!
StarkillerTierraGris 10 months ago
water similar to the mercury
but looks good
UltimRoGuE 10 months ago
look at all that math
Naerbu 11 months ago 69
@Naerbu
nerd
Audi0Phil 8 months ago 2
gameloft needs to start using unreal engine
Jaroldv127 1 year ago
@Jaroldv127 this ain't UE3. it's Ageia.
Andyboi45 1 year ago
looks like mercury
KingofTownz 1 year ago
Wow looks like it's a physx test not ue3. And besides pieeater8822 the ps3 has a gpu and the chip is called a reality synthisyzer. So I think it's kinda gears towards physics. Like fat princess. It uses physx by nvidia so I dont see were your getting the whole ps3 can't handle it. And on top of that it has an 8 core processor each running at around 3.2 ghz each per core. So I call shenanigans on you input for the ps3
dadio46 1 year ago
@dadio46 PS3 has 1 core what the hell are you talking about? PhysX utilizes OpenGL, and DirectX, neither of which the PS3 uses. PhysX is also very poorly optimized for CPU, it made for GPU, PS3's GPU struggles at is it, PhysX which can even make higher end PC GPU's bottleneck a little bit, would crash the PS3.
BigdogWitBigdog 1 year ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 1 year ago
@PuLsE0o0 the ps3 uses direct X. you are really funny whats your proof.
gundambob646 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 You said the PS3 uses DirectX. You are wrong.
BudzMcgr33n 9 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 It is not an 8 core processor. It has a single core, supported by 7 vector processors (with an 8th on standby in case 1 of those 7 fails). Would you class your computer as dual core if it had a single core supported by a maths co-processor? No, of course you wouldn't. The ps3 also doesn't use directx, I have literally no idea from where you pulled that utter tripe. Now, stop lying to people and go do some reading, you're making everyone ignorant.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0
"I didn't say that that the PS3 didn't use DirectX"
I know, you said that the PS3 DOES use Directx, that's why I corrected you by saying that it doesn't. Not only were you wrong again, but it's kind of Ironic that someone who has been incorrect in everything they've said so far has (wrongly) accused me of getting something wrong. Seriously, read about stuff before you try to correct people, you'll look far less silly if you do.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 /facepalm
Seriously, what are you, 12? You're getting butthurt because I didn't compliment you on acknowledging that I was right about something that's just common sense. There was no mix up, you were talking a whole bunch of shit about something you clearly knew nothing about. If you consider someone losing their patience with someone who is reading sentences as the oppisite of what they clearly state "trolling" then wow, you really are a tool. Seriously, read a goddamn book.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 Yes, I made one typo, (an actual mistake, ie a slight momentary slip of the finger), you on the other hand were waffling utter horse shit about hardware out of sheer ignorance. Oh, and if YOU'RE* going to try and lecture about spelling and grammar standards:
"it's" = "It is" (contraction, not possessive.)
"your" = "belonging to you" (possessive),
If you can't work out where "it's" and "its" should go, then seriously, go back back to school.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "You still think I purposefully gave out incorrect information?"
No, I don't, In fact I've repeatedly pointed out that you were obviously just too damn lazy/dull/arrogant in your assumption of being correct to actually fact check what you were saying at the time. If you were being deliberately misleading, that would at least indicate intelligence.
Also, calling me stupid then saying "I am leaving on a neutral note" is some full retard shit son.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 Haha, wow, looks like I hit a nerve there. the "full retard son" was actually a reference to a film called tropic thunder, I think you must of read into it a little bit too far judging from your reaction...
And again, repeatedly calling me stupid is not "neutral", I'm open about the fact that I think you're dumb, you're such a hypocrite that you're using all the same slurs and are acting as if you're somehow being totally passive. Fail.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "your comments dull down"
Yes, highlighting the fact that you outlined your own hypocrisy and butthurt is really "dulling down". When somebodies comment essentially consists of "You're stupid, I'm being neutral" then they are very much in full retard mode.
I must say, declaring some kind of obtuse superiority as you make your leave is a GREAT point of argument.
Seriously, stay in school, maybe for another couple of decades.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "I am not trying to declare superiority over you" "I am anything but dumb" "you seem to have the minimum IQ level required for living"
Seriously, this is just getting too easy now.
Are you seriously trying to tell me you make straight A's in English when you can't even tell where "your" and "you're" should be applied? Yeah, I'm not buying that, students get marked down for displaying poor writing skill, which you definitely do.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "I do on the internet because I am not judged as harshly so I don't really care"
So, you use grammatical rules completely the wrong way round because it's easier? Yeah, I'm not buying that...
"if you didn't feel intimidated by my comments then you would have stopped commenting" I keep commenting because you keep responding and making hilariously stupid assertions and half baked excuses. I could easily say that YOUR continued response indicates intimidation too, genius...
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "so the fact I admit my mistakes makes me of lesser intelligence?"
Haha, nice strawman argument bro...
You come across as not particularly intelligent because of:
1. Claiming to be a straight A student but also not having a fucking clue about basic grammar.
2. Pulling bullshit out of your ass and not bothering to check if you're right (which you should of done on reflection.)
That has nothing to do with admitting you're wrong. If you can't address the actual argument, don't speak
pamew 10 months ago
II)
I also LOVE the way it's gone from:
"I am a straight A student, you have the IQ of a coma patient"
to
"Y u so mean to poor little highschool boy :(?"
Seriously, I'm not even TRYING to troll you, and yet here you are leaping from one argument to another like a rat fleeing a sinking vessel.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "I was confused on the fact it had 8 SPEs(Do you know what this is?)"
Right, so now you're asking the guy who had to correct you about the PS3 if he knows about the structure of the processing system he specifically had to correct you about.
Full. Goddamn. Retard.
pamew 10 months ago
Comment removed
PuLsE0o0 10 months ago
@PuLsE0o0 "Your (sic) ignoring the question say it, what is an SPE?"
Frankly I'm just still processing what a fucking stupid question that is. I actually explained what SPE's are and what they do when I corrected your statement that the ps3 had "8 cores". Seeing as you apparently can't remember anything for yourself, I guess I'll have to repeat the fact that they are RISC units that process simple instructions, taking load off the CPU and increasing bandwidth. Seriously, wtf is wrong with you?
pamew 10 months ago
II) I don't know what you were expecting there, my first comment specifically explained why "cpu + 7 active SPE's + 1 backup does not = 8 core processor". I actually pre-emptively answered it. Again, seriously, are you that dumb that you have to ask something that I already explained to you, or is your memory just THAT bad?
pamew 10 months ago
@pamew Actually, the 8th core is not in standby in case 1 of the 7 fails, the 8th is permanently disabled to increase chip yields.
As at the time the fab process probably had a pretty high failure rate they would let 1 core be broken to sell the chip, it is basically binning except these is only 1 model so they chose to let 1 go.
Since Sony has absolutely no idea whether a given 8th core in a PS3 works it cannot be reserved.
pixphi 10 months ago
@pixphi I was asked what an SPE is in general, (hence referring to the unit, not the console it happens to appear in, amongst other applications) in the case of the PS3 there's yet another locked out purely for the OS to use, so that leaves 6 for actual games. It's still immensely powerful when programmed for properly, although apparently everyone outside of Sony considers this too "complex" for game work, which is a shame, as it's a great platform, IMO.
pamew 10 months ago
@pamew You said the 8th on standby, which in any context of the PS3's processor is false.
You can say the PS3 is immensely powerful but I could just as easily say a 5870 with 1600 SP's and a hugely wide 5-SP pipeline is even more powerful.
Whereas the PS3's processor achieves 230.4 GFLOPs, the 5870's 1600 SP's achieve 2.72 TFLOPs.
Which is about 12 times more powerful, so compared to the general computing landscape it is not so powerful.
pixphi 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pixphi "You can say the PS3 is immensely powerful"
Yes, when programmed for properly.
"I could just as easily say a 5870 with 1600 SP's and a hugely wide 5-SP pipeline is even more powerful."
I should hope so, it's newer tech. And again, kickass if you can get it to do what you want. Folding@home comes to mind for a cool use of all that power, (and a very constructive one too).
pamew 10 months ago
@pixphi nerd
x3loaded 8 months ago
This is a Physx!
venator5 1 year ago
Like black mercury.
OnlyVideoGuyOnEarth 1 year ago
yuck!
WardSennes 1 year ago
Who's gonna be cleaning up this mess?
perfectperfecto 1 year ago 2
This is a PhysX demo. This has nothing to do with Unreal Engine.
Nintendoguy5794 1 year ago
ths is so realistic
marcin4645 1 year ago
What Happend Here???
colin1295 1 year ago
@colin1295 this must be under BP's ownership
Esuld 1 year ago
NOW WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET THIS IN A VIDEO GAME? fucking bullshit
gregor00005 1 year ago
@gregor00005
Never, because PS3s probably couldn't take this yet or game developers aren't seriously going to put this much time recreating this effect.
pieeater8822 1 year ago
looks like a mercury leak... XD awsome by the way i thought that any game had that... it would be awsome to work a bit on it and make smaller particles to make it more real, but would be wourst for the computer
windowshacker09 1 year ago
soo rendered.
ernis1100 1 year ago
@ernis1100 it is realtime, just running on a powerfull PC, that is why we dont see things like this in games, the engine can do it IF you have the hardware to run it.
spacecoke 1 year ago
one question
how?
hkev96 1 year ago
Not realistic... The fluid just like shit:D
Crunker2 1 year ago
@Crunker2 like oil
kenork493 1 year ago
haha 3 years has past still i have not seen this in games !
kloakenskansen 1 year ago
Every game that uses the Unreal Engine 3 looks like shit to me. The games end up all looking the same.
PCgame4life 1 year ago
ooo , that is so unreal ...
i can imagine mega man legends 3 being made with that engine.
are those really rendered in real time?
SonicWorldAdventurer 1 year ago
Nvidia Physx comon make some stuff like this actually happen.
Protoking 1 year ago
hmm... why dont we see this in a map :/ or even ingame?
videoGunZ 1 year ago
I guess 'cause most people dont have a physx card.
chulk607 1 year ago
too bad :( this would be really funny
videoGunZ 1 year ago
Hell yes! It WILL happen though... just a little patience hehe.
chulk607 1 year ago
XD that aint any cool fluid eff .... it looks like mercury or something ... it needs a work out on density and viscosity ....
Roxas99Yami 2 years ago 3
looks like oil lol
mcgelite 2 years ago
it says fluid, not water..
whattheima 2 years ago 11
he never said what it was, looks like some thick oil or mercury even
Kiyamlol 1 year ago
ever play gmod with unreal engine 3? its sick
cheeseonmybacon111 2 years ago
@cheeseonmybacon111 I dont think that you can get gmod to run on that engine.
sw5451 2 years ago
@cheeseonmybacon111 I bet, my computer is shit on a stick though it would probably crash.
DevinTClark 2 years ago
@cheeseonmybacon111 how on earth do you get a source engine game to run on unreal engine? exactly you cant.
stewart113 2 years ago
@cheeseonmybacon111 mmm...where get gmod whit uengine 3?source engine 2 SUCKS!
boom122808 1 year ago
Well actually you could download the udk and compile a quick map you make with all the props you want to build with or something. A physgun is included I believe, as is multiplayer. As for a gmod?
Maybe some day.
Justin712 1 year ago
Now source engine can't do that..
aviator1223 2 years ago 3
Not the unreal engine, this is footage before Nvidia aquired physx.
majorhavoxg1 2 years ago 32
sexy
SupportShotgun 2 years ago
Cool!, Source engine cant do that, THe source engine is primitive >:0!
aviator1223 2 years ago 2
The unreal engine doesn't have this yet, these two tech demos rendered really slowly using Ageia PhysX, these both took hours to be rendered in the unreal engine, this is not game footage...
TymaxBeta 2 years ago 3
@TymaxBeta
It is well doable in realtime. You can download several demos, and the SDK were able to use it aswell. Just look at all the other RT water effects.
Grimmcorpse 2 years ago
Source engine is not a physic engine.
Niklasdiver123 2 years ago
finally someone understands me :D
raphu604 2 years ago
Oil! I lurvs the oil! *nom*
Evatar7 2 years ago 2
is that real time?
Nkatsikanis 2 years ago
It kinda looks like the cut scenes from Command and Conquer 95. Anyone else think?
Nintendoguy5794 2 years ago 4
2007....
Janovjev 2 years ago
its a Demo from the old Ageia PhysX... i dont this this is UE3 at all...
kastor159 2 years ago 41
@kastor159 No, Ageia is used in UE3. But this is just showing the physx off of it's own graphics engine, not specifically UE3.
xXBlu3Haz3Xx 1 year ago
Feels kinda unrealistic.
lcmy 2 years ago
Duh its Unreal Engine
eeyk1993 2 years ago
tutorials in making this? or anything pointing in the right direction?
please?
F6104906 2 years ago
Comment removed
sm1tty5569 2 years ago
I have 2 questions.
1. Can this be done with the UE3 distributed with Unreal Tournament 3, and if so is there a tutorial?
2. Is the container that the oil was held in DMM?
insaneh4 2 years ago
they show oil coz it looks more realistic. the thing is that the water on this engine looks exactly the same consistancy. its just another color.
ghosthunter2006 2 years ago
wow. just. fraekkin. wow.....
pilr18 2 years ago
... Can't w8 to ee crysis 2... then we'll see which engine is best i guess...
COHneger 2 years ago
crysis 2 will have cryengine 3... you can see how it looks on wikipedia...
HaxoThe1337 2 years ago
drink oil often?
paronfisk 2 years ago 3
anyone got a match?
zomgreturpant 2 years ago 3
thats physx dude, unreal doesnt use particle effects for fluid animations.
slmjml 2 years ago
physx running in unreal engine 3
jaju123456 2 years ago
no...... thats just physx...... u cant make 2 of the same type of engines run together dude
slmjml 2 years ago
How do u think mirrors edge uses physx? That uses Unreal Engine 3. You just modify it slightly to use it.
jaju123456 2 years ago
it replaces it.
slmjml 2 years ago
It replaces the physics engine but not the graphics engine
jaju123456 2 years ago 4
and what is in the video unreal?
BlackAssMan2 2 years ago
That looked pretty nice to be honest.
UnibX 2 years ago
cry engie 3 is not so laggy noobs and the physics are better !?!?!? then ce2
benschidikt 2 years ago
Thats not the unreal 3 engine, I saw that on another site as a demo for Ageia Physx
jusmeig 2 years ago
Because its "unreal" Dipshit =D
Cal0wnsU 2 years ago
Why they used mercury instead of water?
;)
marktherev 2 years ago
Were a long way from realtime Fluid Effects like that.
TheArky 2 years ago
Eeeeeee . This's not unreal engine 3 . This demo was running on a simple custom engine just to show physics .
hydzior 2 years ago
is it pre-rendered?
only nvidia can use ageia physix isnt it?
ilhadosmacacos 2 years ago
apparently this scene took 9+ hours to render
on todays personal computers (mine) it takes 0 seconds and runs at 30+fps
but look at the post date it surprises me less when i see it
angusm33 2 years ago
thats cool but my dick is bigger than yours
xSubliminaLx 2 years ago
that's umm... scary
angusm33 2 years ago 2
never saw anything that looked like this in any game
half the stuff they promised from the unreal engine didnt even show up in most of the games that used it
yellowfellow 2 years ago 14
developers should have been buying off the source engine instead of the unreal engine
yellowfellow 2 years ago 2
you should take a loke at the cry engime 3 ..
alexanderstukov 2 years ago
oh yeah that looks really really good
when i said i've never seen anything like this i meant anything on the unreal engine that looked like this
yellowfellow 2 years ago
yeah ce3 roxx
TheElectricFlood 2 years ago
fuck cry engine 3. it might produce good visual results, yea, but the performance sucks
crowtenchu 2 years ago
cry engine 3 is terrible.. cry engine 2 is way better
sabertoothray 2 years ago
cause they dont support aegia physics (or whatever its spelled.
ViolentBiscuits 2 years ago
YEAH THEY'RE STUPID FUCKS!! AUUHHAHAH
lol
yellowfellow 2 years ago
@yellowfellow why is it that not a single game has physics as realistic as this...
melistentodeathmetal 1 year ago
@yellowfellow (i know this answer is late) thats because not everybody got a graphicscard powerful enough for that^^
videoGunZ 1 year ago
@videoGunZ yeah it looks like they were using a super computer to run that, but again ive never seen any games even today that use that kind of water physics or even destruction physics
like... bad company 2? their destruction is pre determined and their stuff usually just pops out of existance instead having real applied physics
yellowfellow 1 year ago
@yellowfellow once upon a time... naaw bad beginning of a sentence :D
some time ago, i tried to build maps for ut2004 with complete destructible buildings: every stone in a wall was a physical object! so if the wall is standing normally, you got normal fps too. but if you shoot it, your fps are falling same way like the wall :/ physics arent that easy for your pc :)
hope you understand my bad english :)
videoGunZ 1 year ago
@videoGunZ Nah, your english is excellent.
xjod9 1 year ago
@xjod9 thank you
videoGunZ 1 year ago
@yellowfellow because they were all destined for that shitbox 360. if they were on pc then we would see most if not all the features.
lilHamminator 1 year ago
@lilHamminator i agree back in 2005 physics was amazing, and as soon as consoles came out, its like we went backwards 4 years
yellowfellow 1 year ago
@yellowfellow consoles stole the limelight from pcs and along with that the tech that is ever evolving just vanished, ie. physics. its really fucking dumb i tell you, nowadays its all about wowing the dumbass 12 yr old consumers and making a quick buck on a game...
lilHamminator 1 year ago
@lilHamminator You mean, MW2? Like how they yoinked away all the features PC users loved it for, then sold a billion copies of it anyhow? Yeah, that's the fuckin' reason I don't own a single console. They stagnate the FUCK out of technology, and I had my fill of that back with the PS2.
Removes 1 year ago
@Removes
Sweetsecrets23 1 year ago
@yellowfellow the engine can do it but most hardware can not, esspecialy console hardware
spacecoke 1 year ago
@spacecoke lol thats how they get us huh
they show us ridiculous demos of calculations that you need super computer to run, and when the final games come out they just say, well its your fault cause our engine can actually do this
lol
yellowfellow 1 year ago
@yellowfellow yeh lol... bastards xD
spacecoke 1 year ago
@yellowfellow That is up to the developers to decide whether or not they want to use it. The features are there. Download UDK and take a look for yourself...
AbsolutePixelMaster 1 year ago
It look more like Blender software then UE but it is still cool
lepszy92 2 years ago
Comment removed
LineRider2105 2 years ago
Where to get this Prog?
kaason2 2 years ago
unreal engine 3 is programm u need to buy and its ungody expensive
goblinhk 2 years ago
this isn't unreal engine 3 lol, don't remember for sure but i think it has something to do with that physics card for pc's, Ageia PhysX i think
baholete 2 years ago 3
You dont think that Unreal Engine 3 has the capabilities of the PhysX effects? (...)
Since PhysX improve gameplay in UT3 :P
RebelwowPonta 2 years ago
it looks better then the crytech fluid effect but i would guess that that takes up alot more cpu/mem stuff as crytech's crysis one just kinda left a decal on the ground for a lil wile insted of having it be an actual object that stays and pushes shit around they might have made a new one for a coming up game tho duno
Devera510 2 years ago
cool :D
Motocross40swe 2 years ago
not bad. i want to see cryteck engine's
jasonjapi 2 years ago