• Cracked Software Sites

If you are new, please read. Also check out our sister subreddit.IF YOU ARE NEW TO THIS SUBREDDIT, PLEASE READ THIS POST. You do know what happened with the first game and it's implementation of the Gameworks PhysX, right? You did check that out before mistakenly suggesting that this couldn't be a problem this time as well, right.?I'll give you the spoiler: PhysX was built into the first game at a fundamental level. There was NO OPTION TO TURN IT OFF because it was an innate part of the way the game was built. The game was said - by the devs - to be performing something like 600 PhysX calculations every second, from the effect of airflow over the car to the friction of the tyre on the tarmac.

Everything was based on it.That's why the original ran so poorly on all hardware, but hit AMD particularly hard. It was as close to a game being locked to specific hardware as PC has been outside of VR headsets.

Cracked Software Sites

This isn't like switching off Geralt's hair and just getting on with the questline: this is a case of a sequel to a game which was specifically designed to favour a particular hardware vendor.Get your facts straight. Read on a few posts and you find. So rather than removing it which is bs for those with Nvidia cards why not just implement it better? Give the option to turn it off for AMD users, I see no reason why Nvidia users shouldn't be able to have these nice features, as someone with a 1080 Ti it's nice being able to have these settings on but for someone with a weaker card they should be able to turn it off, simple.The Witcher 3 had optional hairworks, PC can't handle it or you have an AMD card? Simply turn it off, Killing Floor 2 has physx flex, same thing applies, cant handle it or have an AMD card?

Turn it off, I think they should implement gameworks but this time do it properly, don't screw over users who can't handle it or straight up can't use it. And therein lies the problem: they built their entire game around it to such an extent that they can't give players an on/off switch. It sounds as though the sequel is the same, too, with the 1070-beating Vega 56 lagging well behind the GTX 1060, and the Fury X losing to the 970.If those early results are accurate then SMS can fuck themselves for twice locking their game behind a specific GPU vendor. PC is supposed to be an open platform, and they have just locked 30% of gamers out of being able to run their game. To be fair, they were cunts to do this the first time. (I've got an NVIDIA card) but because of the release date, surely the 2nd game will just be a revamped version of the 1st game?Like I don't expect any company to completely rewrite the code and redo the assets for a sequel only 2 years later. (It sounds like some major overhaul work to get rid of PhysX if it were so present in the game.)Expecting the problem from the first game to not exist in the second sounds overoptimistic.

Unless they made it like 5, or 10 years later, instead of 2. The developers already denied that physx has any notable performance penaltyDenuvo said the same thing about Rime.As for Project Cars, the game used version 3.2.4.1 of PhysX, which did involve GPU-based acceleration. In other words, it was built around a version of PhysX that did offload calculations to Nvidia GPUs, resulting in it being inherently biased towards decreased CPU overhead exclusively on Nvidia graphics cards.I've actually seen them making contradictory statements about the 600Hz stuff, so that's up in the air for the moment. For what it's worth, the source you just linked contains this quote from SMS:'The physics systems run completely independently of the rendering and main game threads and utilizes 2 cores at 600Hz'- immediately after saying:'The Madness engine uses PhysX for collision detection and dynamic objects, which is a small part of the overall physics systems'- but without actually explaining whether they distinguish between 'dynamic objects' and 'the physics systems'.