Nvidia HairWorks in COD: Ghosts

[ocre]

I don't really care who has better hair right now, tressfx or hairworks, I just care that they are competing with each other to make better hair/fur effects so that maybe, just MAYBE, we will finally get games where people aren't bald, helmeted, or have plastic hair.

Competition is GOOD.

I agree with you 100%. Why would anyone not?

 

[Reticula]

AMD has lifelike hair too, on wolves (I think this is some form of tressfx demo?):

No, that was actually an early demo of same HairWorks tech for Witcher 3

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

 

[Carfax83]

AMD has lifelike hair too, on wolves (I think this is some form of tressfx demo?):

I actually think this wolf looks more impressive than those doggies in Call of Duty Ghost do.
That said it looks a million times better with PhysX hair on, that it does without it on.

Hair physx was/is something the gameing world needed.

That's not an AMD TressFX demo, it's a PhysX demo from the Witcher 3, so it's NVidia tech. Witcher 3 will have fur PhysX on animals, monsters and characters with fur coats even..

 

[NTMBK]

Here's hoping that we get a hair tech war! I'm sick of bald space marines.

 

[blackened23]

Yes its a economic success. But it doesnt change that even bf2 kills it in both gfx and dynamics. It simply looks like lipstick on a 6 year old game because thats what it is. Fine for the old consoles. I hope people will move at some time so there is incentives for the devs to make better engines. Fish in water, dogs with a fuhr, and exploding gaz stations. Argggg.

The great thing about COD Ghosts is that the game works and is mostly fun for mindless multiplayer even though it's an aging engine. The series hasn't really progressed in the past few years, sure, but it's a stable game with good netcode and can be brainless entertainment. (although I greatly prefer BLOPS 2 over Ghosts..). The same really can't be said for that other franchise which was rushed out of EA's door for a quick cash grab. That game looks nice.....
WHEN it works.

As far as the fur effects itself? It's free effects and looks pretty neat. It doesn't hurt to have, i'm thinking.

 

[Erenhardt]

As far as the fur effects itself? It's free effects and looks pretty neat. It doesn't hurt to have, i'm thinking.

When applying standards that some asked to apply to free-sync, this is not free in any case. It required a development time and a bunch of coffee cups, all of which are covered from money from consumers

 

[Dmudgkvddjnv]

DirectCompute IS tied to a single vendor.

With all this hair tech coming out, maybe this will be the generation we actually see a few games that use it. DirectCompute based, meaning not tied to any specific vendor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MskSXO3Mx4c

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/nvidia_hairworks_cod_ghosts_fur_and_hair_simulation_solution.html

 

[Red Hawk]

DirectCompute IS tied to a single vendor.

I'm pretty sure that DirectX 11 graphics chips from Nvidia, AMD, and even Intel can all use DirectCompute.