- it's a nice integration into CUDA but the effects run really slow in UT3 and generally drag down my framerate from the usual 60 to below 30... that Lighthouse map is especially bad, it looks like the bricks fall down and settle in slow motion!
>>Lots of debris = less fps than on vanilla maps... but "slomo" with a card like yours ?? Did you try the latest drivers ?

- I've read and heard that Gears of War can use PhysX, but I have no idea whether the effects are on or off when I'm playing the game as there's no option like in UT3 to turn on Hardware Physics processing. Upon inspection of explosion effects in the game I can't discern any difference between accelerated and non-accelerated GoW.
>>And that's where people get confused about PhysX : you can't always accelerate it using a GeForce or Ageia card ! It's basically only a part of a game's engine dedicated to physics (gravity and such). Lots of games use it - but very few feature hardware PhysX support or advanced Physx effects... GoW, like all UE3-based games, uses PhysX - but unlike UT3, it doesn't support hardware acceleration of PhysX afaik.

- I haven't had time to try Splinter Cell Double Agent with PhysX but as far as I know there's no in-game option to enable PhysX either. Argh!
>>Same here. I think you don't even need to install the PhysX drivers except for multiplayer mode (not sure). No hardware support anyway.

All in all I wish Intel had done something substantial with Havok.
>>and I wish nvidia will do sth substantial with PhysX ! :lol: (Still very few titles at the moment...)

agreed. I played that Crossover game...the Agiea only release. It was fun, but from what I was told even with the card it ran like a dog.
>> :?: What is that game ??

Unreal Tournament 3
Well as far as UT3 goes I am quite unimpressed, Tornado had near no destructible elements, ... Lighthouse had very few destructible elements, Heat Ray had no destructible elements that I could find ...
>> :shock: Were you playing with your eyes closed ? Or in Spectator mode ?? :lol:

-Tornado : all concrete walls ! windows ! red steam pipes ! energy balls/locks !
-Lighthouse : barrels ! passages through bricks walls, concrete floors and ceilings ! windows ! wood planks !
-Heat Ray PhysX : barricades ! neon signs (yeah, even that dragon over there) ! wooden platforms ! gas canisters !

Thoughts
I hope one day we will see games with fully destructible environments, with real looking simulations of walls being broken instead of being clearly, partially scripted (Warmonger) or Unpredictable UT3
>>Unpredictable ? Play a couple rounds and you know exactly which parts of a brick wall will break on Lighthouse. C'mon, advanced PhysX deserves more than a 2-minute ride on each map ! And I'm not saying so just because I'm a declared 'worshipper' of that stuff :mrgreen:

I can imagine a simple touch to a game like police tape blowing in the wind will look great and be quite easy to implement. Also effects like snow, rain, hale and water flowing have great potential.
>>Realistic cloth movement (i.e not just an animation loop) already exists in lots of games and doesn't require PhysX's capabilities. It's tearable cloth I'd like to see everywhere !
You should try Switchball (no hw acceleration required, since the game is alas capped at 30 fps...), it has a clever (though sadly underused) way of using this feature : cloth platforms will sustain the weight of a marble ball, but will break under a metal ball - thus leading to "death"... or hidden alternate routes ! :)

"Climatic debris", wind effects and water are interesting too, but I'm not sure PhysX is really appropriate for these. As non-gameplay elements, they'd need to look good before all, and in phase with each game's aesthetics/mood/atmosphere - and PhysX tends to look so like... PhysX. :?