By Eddie Makuch
Head of product management for middleware company says "it will not longer be acceptable to walk into a room where you can't punch a hole in the wall."
Destruction must be at the heart of next-generation games, according to Havok's worldwide head of product management. Speaking with Games Industry International, Andrew Bowell said destructible environments will be a cornerstone of PlayStation 4 and next Xbox games.
Microsoft trademarked Direct Physics. After their acquisition of Havok in 2015, this sounds like a dedicated physics API for DirectX 12.
Like the article says, this sounds like prep for some announcement at E3 and my guess is involving the Scorpio
And XB1.
DX12 HW is designed to be really efficient with advanced physics and lighting renderers, so it looks like the aquisition of Havok was merited after all. Nvidia corrobotates this, saying that their new physics and lighting rendering solution works best on DX12 HW. Scorpio development is supposed to make XB1 games look better too, according to Turn 10, but you're right about it likely being announced at E3.
nah, this is something for developers. It will likely be revealed at //BUILD/ next week.
That's their developer conference.
MS isn't going to leverage Havok to be DX exclusive. That would be completely idiotic considering what they paid to acquire Havok. Havok is worth a lot more as a licensed API or game engine than it is as a marketing tool for DX. If MS leverages havok to be DX exclusive, then it just opens the doors for other capable physics API's to make their way into the market....which on the back end they already are, because some people were concerned MS would strip Havok tools away from them before they could finish development. That isn't something that MS wants, because it just gives more leverage for Vulkan to have a supplimental API which can outdo whatever MS has to offer. That isn't something NVidia wants, because the more people move towards open source compatible solutions, the less relevance their DX ball licking has....and Vulkan and OpenGL have already given AMD an edge almost out of nowhere among developers.
Anyhow, to be more informative, and not seem like I'm merely trying to attack you(because I'm not), this is Havok tools being integrated into DX with a rebranding. It's not something that is hardware dependent, nor does Havok physics tools work on the hardware level like that. Physics tools in general are simple math(relatively speaking) type tools which run extremely fast, and don't require special processes to make effective. Havoks lighting tools work on a similar principal, but are hardware dependent to some degree, however, their lighting processes aren't anything out of the ordinary that wouldn't be built into hardware either way if it's going to support certain functions. Quite honestly, MS current API is actually stronger in the lighting rendering pipeline than Havok ever was.
Personally I wouldn't really trust anything NVidia says about what works best where. If their tools work best on DX hardware, it's because that's all they care to support. Considering NVidia is all about DX because they can't be fussed to make something like Vulkan that their competitor did, what is their opinion on the matter worth at all? NVidia isn't in the business of making physics model processes. They're graphics makers. Their lighting rendering solutions work better on DX hardware, because they were built in conjuction with DX and with DX in mind. Anything they make in terms of physics processing relies strictly on the GPU compute aspects of it's chips, and the math itself doesn't require anything substantial on the processors themselves. Game physics is about as simple physics as it gets. Seriously....game physics algorithms are rudimentary middle school math that can all be done in a few steps, using mostly add, subtract, and multiply with some floating point thrown in to keep it accurate.
Right, Rain, but I didn't say it would be exclusive. I said it would work really well on DX12 HW, which is designed to run physics and lighting. DX12 doesn't make Havok effective, it makes it more effective... or did you forget what a HW accelerator is?
Also, you're really going to call what Nvidia showed at GDC rudimentary math? It is the beginnings of CG quality physics being rendered in real time, and it's far more advanced than any other physics renderers available because of it's use of DX12. They even went as far as to explain that their solution wouldn't run as well on other HW. Besides, the real point is that it doesn't matter how fast physics currently are because there still isn't enough processing power to run complex physics and lighting in real time. Simple ≠ complex.
Furthermore, who says Direct Physics is simply Havok with a new name? MS could have used Havok as a base to build a physics renderer similar to Nvidia's, but MS had mentioned Direct Physics as far back as 2006, so it's likely that MS incorporated elements of Havok into DP and not just changed Havok's name.
As far as the "DX12 ball licking" goes, grow up with that rhetoric. DX12 will make a difference because it's HW >in addition to< being an API. Does PS4 have DX12? Without it, it will have to use emulation of the HW functions in order to render scenes of the same quality, while DX12 will add to the processing of what the XB1 already has. You don't have to believe me, but when XB1 sees parity with PS4 multiplats remember this conversation.
First, let me say I wasn't really trying to dissuage against your comment completely. That wasn't my intent.
But, moving on to address your reply, Havok isn't a hardware based physics engine. That would be something more like PhysX. Havok at it's core is built to be hardware independent. Generally, DX side stuff like this is also hardware independent.
What MS is doing here, is integrating the physis engine into the SDK. That's where it becomes beneficial. Unless MS has greatly revamped the already great Havok tools, I can't see that the way it runs will be changed at all between DX hardware and non DX hardware. It's not to say that certain hardware sets couldn't include processes which run Havok tools functions more effectively, but I feel at this juncture, that is a lot to presume, and outside a couple aspects of the tools, I'm not sure it's necessary due to how efficient the tools already are.
I think it's important to understand just how good Havok tool's are. And I for one am quite excited that it's being implemented into a SDK level solution for many reasons. The socketed approach that has been had to be taken up to now is sufficient, but this just makes everything more streamlined.
Anyhow, onto the math of Nvidia. Yes, I'm going to call it rudimentary math. When I say rudimentary, it's entirely relative to actual complex physics calculations which are used for say actual CG rendering techniques, or real world prediction/application of physics models, which are not practical for in game implementation. The math used in games is simple. It's about as basic as it gets, because that is what works best, and overall, super complex algorithms just aren't needed for any kind of physics that you see in games. Physics, by and large, is made up of "tricks" which uses algorithms which achieve a similar or acceptable result without worrying about exacting precision.
This isn't the same as rendering physics, which is where things like lighting and what not reside. But overly complex algorithms which provide real photo-realistic images are still a long ways off from gaming application. DX hardware or not, you're talking about hundreds of millions of compounding algorithms processed per pixel to abstract how light is reflected, and it takes an exhorbitant amount of time...so even in lighting physics, it uses "simple" math to achieve desireable results.
"who says DXP is merely Havok with a new name"
It's havok tools integrated into the SDK. This is actually known already in the dev community. Many people are excited about it.
If it's more....what would it be? Based on all I've said, what more is needed?
I'm not saying it's all Havok tools, or what MS has changed compared to the Havok tools package, or how exactly it's integrated for development implementation, but it is Havok tools.
As far as growing up....maybe I could have chosen better wording, but NVidia has a history of talking up DX and not taking responsibility for poor performance from anything else because they simply decide not to write drivers. Sorry if my callous description offended you, but that's what NVidia has done for a while now, and it's annoying for devs, and for some people who actually understand that NVidia is often full of sh*t when it comes to this stuff.
"Does PS4 have DX12"
No. But it won't have to emulate it. That's not how API's or tools like this are set up. Havok has run great on PS consoles since it's inception, just as it has on Xbox since it's inception. Havok isn't hardware specific, and despite this new itteration having an SDK level implementation, which is good for Windows hardware support, MS is still going to offer Havok tools in a way that allows for portability. If they don't, they've pretty much just rendered their new toolset useless to any development outside of those which are only meant for windows platform release. Even if they don't offer up Havok, then 3rd party tools will make it more than possible....such as the ones I build which specifically work to port code between platforms where no direct portability is avaiable.
Normally I don't like to list my resume, but consider that I got my first major job in the game industry due to having written my own physics engine, which led to me becoming a tools developer, and I am intimately well versed on how these things work, because it's made up a bulk of my professional career.
That being said, don't take what I say in either comment in this thread as some sort of derision against what MS is doing. This is actually one of the most exciting things I've ever looked forward to on a professional level. It's not something that's going to make a huge difference to the end user, as I assume end results will be on par with what we have now, but from a development perspective, this is pretty exciting stuff.
Sorry if I seem argumentative with you about it, but I actually do understand what's going on here, and I feel that my knowledge on the subject is much more relevant than you're correlations to things which aren't applicable to what is happening here. Going forward, I have no intention of being critical of this, and really look forward to sharing my expertise to those who may wonder what some of all this means for them or development.
So take that for what it's worth.
It just keeps getting better and better. Rich L. was right. There was a lot more news about Scorpio then what he couldn't share.
Simplygon, Havok, Direct Physics... These will definitely help improve game development. Hopefully, we will learn more at E3.
They wouldn't put focus into this at E3. This is dev conference material. So don't hold your breath
@SpaceRanger
"They wouldn't put focus into this at E3. This is dev conference material. So don't hold your breath"
I imagine they will highlight some of the new abilities on the hardware, so please do keep holding your breath.
MS seems to be doing what I hoped...focusing on building game engine elements that not only 3rd party studios could use, but for first party as well.
yes, instead of designa nd build the games themselves, charge others to use your product to makea game for their system.
Ms at the end of the day is looking for the easiest buck
I think it's a new package for what already exists. I know MS has some new physics model API's coming out which are supposed to address some needs which currently have been up to the developer or tool makers to develop. basically they're moving it out of the tools realm, and making them more of an integrated to the SDK solution.
I'm supposed to be getting some information next week on what this is all about. I have a feeling it's just going to be what I already know exists, but put into a MS bundled package, with some workload algorithms likely redesigned from current offerings to match up with the overall DX game loop algorithms....which is something that used to be have to be done on a per game basis.
That in itself is a good thing for developers though, because it means less work on their end to figure out what works best in their own implementations. Kind of requires understanding how 3rd party tools and built in SDK solutions differ from each other in the development cycle, which I'm not going to get into excessive detail about....because I don't know how to talk about it in laymans terms.
Anyhow, I don't see it dramatically changing game development, because there is nothing new on the physics front that is required for current game designs to run.
There is no need right now to reinvent the wheel with complex physics models, because the physics models which have existed for a long time are sufficient, elegant, and efficient. Making them more complicated just makes things worse, and MS knows this, because they're software engineers. When it comes to physics in games, simpler is better, because it means more can be done with the same effect. Game physics is quite literally some of the most basic junior high level math you can imagine nine times out of ten. That's all it needs to be.
I don't see a lot of this being talked about at E3. Dev stuff like this is extremely dry stuff, and people would zone out. When it comes to stuff like this, I'd see them showing, not telling, and when telling, they're likely to simply show and not get into the details. If you want to see how exciting this is on a development level, just watch a build or GDC conference about engineering stuff in general. It's very technical. For those that work in those fields, it can be very interesting, and even cool at times, but to the average person with only a cursory knowledge of game design, and even less knowledge on what's on the game code side of stuff, it's all just a bunch of jargon and high level details about how to make things work. Just think of it the difference between MS showing CD3's destruction physics, versus the actual discussion during the same showing which explained how it worked. How many people actually understood or listened to the technical stuff and how many people actually talked about the results themselves? E3 is about results....Dev conference panels are about boring technical stuff.:)
PhysX was bought out by NVIDIA a long time ago. This is about Havok.
The PhysX middleware nowadays isn't used in that many games, if you were referring to that.
Actually PhysX is used in much more games than what you think
PhysX is full physics engine and it's the main physics engine used in Unreal Engine 3, 4 and Unity 4, 5
most if not all games use these engines use PhysX
but it has some features require nvidia's hardware and we rarely see these features implemented these days
PhysX has always paled in comparison to Havok tools. In any case, I'm not aware that DX ever directly integrated PhysX into it's SDK. It offered socket level implementation, but beyond that, DX had it's own physics API's which were just as capable as physX most of the time, and if they weren't, third party tools were usually more capable. The necessity for things like PhysX aren't even really required anymore. OTOH, SDK level physics integration is really long overdue. Having to tie in a physics engine on top of whatever the API's pipeline was was just an extra step, and could sometimes not work the way it should have without extra work.
@KTF
PhsyX is the main offering for UE and Unity, because it doesn't require anything to include. But most big games use third party physics engines because they're more efficient and typically run more physics algorithms without the need for special hardware(or high level implementation routines). If you look at the credits of any big game, you are much more likely to see the Havok logo somewhere in there, because it's just that good. NVidia had PhysX at a time when it made more sense to have a hardware level solution. Nowadays though, GPU Compute is generally much better and infinitely more versatile. I always felt PhysX was long overdue for retirement.
In this week's definitely videogame-focused podcast, Robin and Phil talk about Havok, The Beginner's Guide and how they don't have any spare time.
Microsoft acquires the leader in 3D physics, Havok from Intel.
Nice get Microsoft. They will now be making money off many games.
...and people kept saying MS is selling Xbox division, yet at every turn MS keeps investing into gaming from MineCraft, DX12 to Havok.
Havok combined with Xbox Live Cloud Compute is going to be amazing! Looking forward to Crackdown 3 beta next summer! :D
@donthate, they could sell Xbox and still license out Havok and DX12 and make plenty of money off of the Minecraft franchise. People used to think Valve would make Half Life 3, but they've been making all the money they need off of Steam. Microsoft may just be thinking, "Hey, maybe they're onto something." The next generation of Xbox may be more like a Steam Machine than a traditional console.
They should rename it Xbox Havok. Would be a complete mind **** seeing that at the start of Uncharted 4 or other Playstation exclusives.
Mad acquisition. RKO outta nowhere. Half the games I see have that Havok logo in them. I wonder why Intel sold it?
@brofist
"Lol more money that could've been spent on a first party studio. It's like monkeys making decisions"
-Yeah 'cause 1st party studio's don't need stupid stuff like a good physics engines even monkeys know games are made out of Elmers glue and pop sickle sticks.
@donthate
-Looks like PC World agrees with you:
"Microsoft gives more weight to gaming plans with Havok physics engine acquisition"
http://www.pcworld.com/arti...
-Naturally it makes sense, Microsoft has continued to invest heavily in gaming with Nadella on the record from day one that gaming is a priority and of course he appointed Phil to make it happen. I think this is a great acquisition since they will continue to licensing Havok's software to other companies including Nintendo and Sony for license fees. It's obviously a great physics engine due to its flexibility for a wide variety of genres which is why so many well known games like Halo, COD, Uncharted, Killzone, L4D, Mortal Kombat, Crackdown, Bioshock, I mean you name it have used it....I just like to see gaming divisions on any platform invest for the future= more games.
Amazing! M$ is clearly going after the throat of gaming.
Halo 5 Guardians is going further this strategy October 27th.
Microsoft sells more than video games. It's silly to assume any money they spend should be used on video games instead. It's not difficult to look online and see how many studios they own and what they are working on. Since this gen started Microsoft has been releasing first party games pretty regularly. I'm not sure what people are comparing them to when they say they should do more.
@ColonelHugh
The only problem with your analogy is that sony does not own Blu-ray, they are 1 of about 20 Board of Director Members, while as of now unless I missed something Microsoft owns Havok. Plus the VC-1 codec used in Blu-rays is owned by Microsoft. Sony has no proprietary ownership of Havok's physics engine.
That said no need for any petty back and forth, Havok will still be used for sony games.
@brofist
Wut?lmao. This move benefits Ms studios. Lmao. You guys. XD
@4show
Well said.
"Part of this innovation will include building the most complete cloud service, which we’ve just started to show through games like “Crackdown 3.”
MS is about to take gaming to the next level.
Can't wait:
-Unmatched destruction
-effects like volumetric fog
-smarter and more NPCs
@Septic
Why would it be a complete mind ****?
It'll be business as usual.
@4show
Sony owns a chunk of Blu-Ray, CD, and DVD. They get royalties for each. MS owns VC1 and WMV/WMA, both of which are in PS3 and PS4 (not sure about the latter with PS4, but PS3 does support it)... and now one of many physics middleware options.
End point, both pay each other for various technologies that they own patents for.
This move doesn't really strengthen their position in the console war, as there are other physics middleware options available and Sony can just code their own as well if they really needed to. However, this does open a new revenue stream, especially from third party developers.
Nothing.
It's just like starting Sony laptop and seeing Windows startup screen.
If they charge (Sony) more for developing games then that would be stupid bcoz there are lots of other game engines devs can buy. Hell.. Sony's teams can make own engines and share it around.
@ Genuine
"Why would it be a complete mind ****?
It'll be business as usual."
When have you seen Xbox or Playstation in the boot up for one of the opposing platforms?
@Septic- ""Why would it be a complete mind ****?
It'll be business as usual."
When have you seen Xbox or Playstation in the boot up for one of the opposing platforms?"
?? Why are you so immature for? Do you think that because your a fanboy that MS and Sony are too? They are a business,
GenuineUser is 100% correct, this is business.
When do you we see MS on a non-MS platform? Anytime you use Windows Media licences ie right now for PS3 and PS4 (if it supports WMA that is), Windows is on Sony's Vaios (when they use to make em) and you can still use windows media licences on Sony devices, Sony owns a part of Bluray as they where one of the companies along with Panasonic that created it...you very much still see their name along with several other companies as credited for that format when used else where, You'll see MS's name in Minecraft when downloaded else where as they own the IP, you see Sony's name when Spider-man games are on other platforms...I'm sorry but you can't be this young as to just think Sony and Microsoft are like cats and dogs.
They are a business, as to why MS has Bluray in their system, they are a damn business, their goal is to MAKE MONEY, Sony's next media format they are working on, expect it to be a MS system down the line and for PC as a drive as its not some childish, immature, fanboy tog of war...they both work with each other in many, many different areas.
Sony's films and music are not BANNED on MS platforms lol, Sony's devices are not BANNED by MS on Windows and Minecraft is still on PS3 ,Vita and PS4, in fact it came out AFTER MS made that deal.
Minecraft Story by Telltale is coming to all platforms...MS clearly owns the IP being used.
Sooo no, MS isn't like you, they actually care about making money more than trying to win some silly battle.
Their battle is trying to make money, not fighting Sony LOL!
Sooo "Would be a complete mind **** seeing that" Yes..for someone who knows so little about the industry as to not know both companies work with each other often.
Or did you think that Diddy Kong Racing DS had nothing to do with Microsoft despite them owning the team? Both MS and Sony own so many licences that they both use from each other its not even funny. Your merely new to this concept.
That's pretty huge news, I hope Microsoft continues to allow havoc to also work on third party games.
Congrats Microsoft
Of course they are, only way to make money. But I think the best version of this proprietary technology will be exclusive with it's cloud implemenations obviously.
Microsoft is a competitive monster, bunch of honey badters. Can't say the same for Sony. So nothing surprising.
All Major publishers games use Havok. Lots of revenue to be gained by Havok in the future. Especially if MS buys AMD and boosts it's Software support.
@Death,
Microsoft went to court (and lost) for *illegally tying* Internet Explorer to the Windows OS - claiming it was an intergral "feature" of Windows. Even though at the time there was a retail version of IE available as a separate product. The DoJ won and MS was convicted of being a predatory monopoly.
@4show: They're not giving Win 10 away for free, they're giving you a free upgrade from Win 7 or Win 8. That's not free. Just wanted to make that distinction before we started the thought that it was completely free.
@Ratchet,
The issue with IE wasn't that it was integral to Windows, the issue was Netscape which owned the browser market with over 75% market share was selling their browser software. When Microsoft made internet browsing free, Netscape no longer had a business model. As the net grew and more people used it we did indeed see the vulnerability created for the OS through the browser. By having a significant share of the browser market, Microsoft has a better chance of correcting these exploits faster. The DOJ was unable to determine the significance the net has on OS security. The only thing they could see was Netscapes business losses since Microsoft gave a competing software solution away for free. I'm not sure how much of a win this was for the DOJ since Internet Explorer is still part of the Windows platform.
It's actually a much bigger get than many people may realize. Havok is a very popular engine for use in the mid-tier Japanese market, and it's physics engine is used in about half the games out there.
@ITPython
I doubt that. That runs into the realm of anti-trust laws. They'd more likely just give discounts to their partners.
well its great for microsoft because with sony easily outselling them,now MS will be earning from Sony so its win win for MS.
very clever move but i stick with my ps4,although xb1 is moving up my xmas list every fast
What most people don't know is that Havok has almost become a full game engine a few years ago, not just a physics engine.
Maybe MS wants to enter the engine war by using Havok as a starting point?
Congratulations on them getting away from xbox and going more towards software like the company should
Yeah, that comment made my head hurt, like wtf?
lol, I mean yes its software because games are software but how is buying something that's a huge part of making games(software) for xbox one(hardware) which is a platform that plays games "getting away from xbox"????
Yeah, I'm not sure how acquiring Havok is "getting away from Xbox". I mean this is the headlines it created "Microsoft gives more weight to gaming plans with Havok physics engine acquisition" http://www.pcworld.com/arti...
"Will this move force Sony to fully develop Naughty Dog's physics engine?"
No it won't force sony to do anything. they could if they want to. But do you really think sony would put it's up coming exclusives on hold until Naughty dog's creates their own physics engine just because MS bough havok?
You do know that the reason devs license havok in the first place is because its much more expensive and time consuming to make your own physics engine for each game. Plus a 1 developed for an individual game may not be flexible enough to implement in other exclusive games, that alot of upfront investment that may not payoff, hence licensing is a popular solution.
I'm just here to say Havok was created in my home town :D
That's all :)
Hopefully microsoft play nice and don't jack up the licensing fee to people outside their family and friends.
"the leader in 3D physics" - Maybe ten years ago, there are better alternatives out now, although they are the "leader" in that they were great at doing business and made themselves very affordable (not to mention really good tech support for studios using it). I'm hoping none of that changes and it only improves from here on out. (though I am somewhat sceptical).
Kudos to Microsoft for saying "The leading PROVIDER of 3D physics" in the blog/article, at least they know how to be honest unlike whoever wrote the Desciprtion above on N4G.
Going off the blog it seems MS are going to do right by Havok and not change its business model one bit :)
Was an enjoyable read, there was a lot of humility in that blog, somethign we don't get enough of in this industry (though that trend does seem to be changing, or I'm dreaming?!)
Very cool indeed,
From another article.
" http://www.businessinsider....
"Microsoft developers who are planning on using the company's new DirectX 12 graphics display technology, the Visual Studio programming software, or the company's Microsoft Azure supercomputing cloud, Havok will be an integrated option that will make it easier for them to drop it in."
So looks like MS are getting ready for the DX12 and Cloud Compute assault next year by using a middleware physic engine from Havok and the main point of the purchase.
If that's the case then MS exclusive games will be fire if you combine DX12 and cloud.
This is exactly what i was worried about, and why i dislike where this is heading. Welcome to another step of the always online future.
@Rookie
Nice article
"Havok has also made its way to Hollywood: Big-time movies like "The Matrix" and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" used Havok's software to power their special effects"
Wow. i dint know this.
@crash
And how did you come to that conclusion ? You part of the same group that says Dx12 and Cloud Compute will do nothing for X1 ? Sounds like it...
Really wasn't expecting them to snap up havok.
I wonder where they are with the talks with AMD (if any are going on).
Indeed, MS seems really intend with having a dedicated hardware company. Havok's acquisition also seems to highlight interest in game engine software, I wouldn't be surprised if they bought Crytek or Unreal for their respective engines.
Microsoft would have to deal with Tencent, or some other Chinese company to get their hands on Unreal. I can't remember if it was Tencent that has a majority share in EPIC.
I couldn't see Unreal. Epic is worth too much, and they'd have to be willing to sell. Just because MS could afford it doesn't mean they'll snatch it up. Crytek seems to bounce around from being worth a lot, to being in trouble, so that may be worthwhile.
@aviator
with all this talk about cloud, dx12 and now havok i think we will see many more games using the cloud tech in the future..and the rumor about the amd aquisition makes more sense now..
Seems like they will use them to also further develop cloud physic processing, nice.
I really do like your avatar, but I guess not that many people remember "Mister" Chief. Or I'm not funny. Whatever!
Next Gen Metal Gear Rising, you'll be able to cut World Marshal's building real time, no FPS drop
I'm just joking, but i think that would be great, but not really needed in everything, probably, in Godzilla game, that would awesome.
I don't know about that, sure i think nearly every game should have lots of destruction next gen with the massive amount of ram available, but making everything destructible could just as easily break a game as it would help it.
I would like destruction to be more dynamic. Depending on how hard something hits a destructible object, the more pieces come flying off and such.
that sounds intriguing.
although i still hoped they'd take more time into
the gameplay itself.....
and storyline.....
who else wanna see the nextgen version of the Euphoria Engine ?