Monday, April 24th 2017

NVIDIA Demonstrates GameWorks Flow Tech Under DirectX 12

by
Raevenlord
 Discuss (25 Comments)
NVIDIA Flow, was previously announced by the company in 2016's GDC as the new GameWorks implementation for combustible fluid, fire and smoke simulation (superseding NVIDIA's Turbulence and FlameWorks.) It makes use of an adaptive sparse voxel grid for maximum flexibility with the least memory impact, being optimized for use of Volume Tiled Resources when available. With this technology being implemented on the Unreal Engine 4 soon, the company is now looking to increase developer awareness of the tool by showcasing its capabilities.

In the video below, the company is showing off its DirectX 12 implementation of the technology, which showcases gas combustion that results into real-time simulation of fire and smoke in the air.

Source: Developer.Nvidia.com

Related News

Add your own comment

25 Comments on NVIDIA Demonstrates GameWorks Flow Tech Under DirectX 12

#1
RejZoR
Now, I do like this. And since it's DX12, I have no problem with it (opposed to be PhysX specific thing run either through CUDA for NVIDIA or on CPU for AMD).
Posted on Reply
#3
ZoneDymo
idk, im not too impressed, plus for the most part this is not really interesting.
Fire in videogames atleast its a problem for the player in 99% of the cases and also scripted in 99% of the cases.

You cant have fire taking over a level as that would make it un-winnable and if that would be the mission, get away from the fire, you would not be looking at it.

So when its all controlled anyway, who cares about this sorta physics based real time generation for fire and smoke etc.
Posted on Reply
#4
Lucas_
und 50% cripple the performance . Toll !
Posted on Reply
#5
RejZoR
ZoneDymoidk, im not too impressed, plus for the most part this is not really interesting.
Fire in videogames atleast its a problem for the player in 99% of the cases and also scripted in 99% of the cases.

You cant have fire taking over a level as that would make it un-winnable and if that would be the mission, get away from the fire, you would not be looking at it.

So when its all controlled anyway, who cares about this sorta physics based real time generation for fire and smoke etc.
Well, only this way you can make fire/smoke an integral part of gameplay. To be fully dynamic. Imagine a Ranbow Six Siege or CS:GO with such mechanic. Tracing the movement of people coming out of smoke, motion of molotov fire, spreading of smoke through corridors etc. Coz right now, all this stuff is still on the level of games from 1999...
Posted on Reply
#7
Fluffmeister
Looks good, unlike some open initiative that disappears after being announced.
Posted on Reply
#8
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
RejZoRWell, only this way you can make fire/smoke an integral part of gameplay. To be fully dynamic. Imagine a Ranbow Six Siege or CS:GO with such mechanic. Tracing the movement of people coming out of smoke, motion of molotov fire, spreading of smoke through corridors etc. Coz right now, all this stuff is still on the level of games from 1999...
Whenever I play a game with any kind of undergrowth I just want to set a fire. The problem with decent fire simulations in games is that you'd have to limit it somehow, make it artificial. Otherwise everything in every game with fire would always burn. Which is wonderful obviously, but still.
Posted on Reply
#9
ViperXTR
Oh another addition to nVidia Lagworks?
Posted on Reply
#10
RejZoR
I'm talking flame motion when initiated, not the fact that fire would just spread to everything.

For example, the tracking of players exiting smoke grenades as the smoke would be dragged out of the "cluster" with player motion, so you could see from a smoke where player went from it.

Fire from molotov would spill out more realistically, especially when it's not on a flat surface, like for example rolling it down the stairs, cretaing a moving fire wall. Or spilling it across the edge of platform which is something you just can't even do today with primitive contact calculations.

Then again, CPU physics could be used way more even to such extent, but no one even bothers doing it. Why not, I have no clue.
Posted on Reply
#11
Prima.Vera
Sorry, but not impressed at all. Still a very very very very looooong way to go to match the Hollywood style of SFX.
Posted on Reply
#12
atomicus
ZoneDymoidk, im not too impressed, plus for the most part this is not really interesting.
Fire in videogames atleast its a problem for the player in 99% of the cases and also scripted in 99% of the cases.

You cant have fire taking over a level as that would make it un-winnable and if that would be the mission, get away from the fire, you would not be looking at it.

So when its all controlled anyway, who cares about this sorta physics based real time generation for fire and smoke etc.
This certainly isn't true for the upcoming title Flamegirl: Adventures in Flameworld, a third-person action adventure where you play the role of Flamey, a girl made of flame, who is traverses the fiery landscape on her journey through Flameworld, accompanied by her flame companions Hot John and Bill Burns, two adolescent flame children whose parents were killed by the Fire Demon, Flamerson Flame, who rules the kingdom with a molten iron fist.
Posted on Reply
#13
Mussels
Freshwater Moderator
atomicusThis certainly isn't true for the upcoming title Flamegirl: Adventures in Flameworld, a third-person action adventure where you play the role of Flamey, a girl made of flame, who is traverses the fiery landscape on her journey through Flameworld, accompanied by her flame companions Hot John and Bill Burns, two adolescent flame children whose parents were killed by the Fire Demon, Flamerson Flame, who rules the kingdom with a molten iron fist.
sounds like an adventure time episode
Posted on Reply
#14
Rosie Scenario
Best thing in FarCry 2. Bushfires. Seriously, this looks OK. I look forward to overheads etc.
Posted on Reply
#15
Slizzo
RejZoRThen again, CPU physics could be used way more even to such extent, but no one even bothers doing it. Why not, I have no clue.
Probably because that would use quite a lot of threads, and developers can really only count on most users having four available at any one time. Hopefully with Ryzen out there, and Intel making moves supposedly to up core/thread count we'll see more physics simulation being implemented into games.
Posted on Reply
#16
kruk
FluffmeisterLooks good, unlike some open initiative that disappears after being announced.
Unlike proprietary garbage, open source cannot disappear. Please do educate yourself before embarrassing yourself further.
Posted on Reply
#17
Fluffmeister
Thought it would be you that took that bait, well done.
Posted on Reply
#18
Steevo
SlizzoProbably because that would use quite a lot of threads, and developers can really only count on most users having four available at any one time. Hopefully with Ryzen out there, and Intel making moves supposedly to up core/thread count we'll see more physics simulation being implemented into games.
This.

And being DX12 it should allow for an even playing field unless Nvidia locks it to CPU only as they have done in the past, then users hack it and show it works as well on other hardware, then Nvidia locks it further and it causes issues on the three games it actually is used on and.....

Well.... Batman.
Posted on Reply
#19
ZoneDymo
atomicusThis certainly isn't true for the upcoming title Flamegirl: Adventures in Flameworld, a third-person action adventure where you play the role of Flamey, a girl made of flame, who is traverses the fiery landscape on her journey through Flameworld, accompanied by her flame companions Hot John and Bill Burns, two adolescent flame children whose parents were killed by the Fire Demon, Flamerson Flame, who rules the kingdom with a molten iron fist.
a yes, where Wonderboy Killercrunch reprises his role in a Smaug cameo and ironically also features Arnold as Dr Freeze.
Posted on Reply
#20
mroofie
krukUnlike proprietary garbage, open source cannot disappear. Please do educate yourself before embarrassing yourself further.
And unlike most open source projects
proprietary "garbage" actually gets improved...
Posted on Reply
#21
Derek12
krukUnlike proprietary garbage, open source cannot disappear. Please do educate yourself before embarrassing yourself further.
Not true. There are many open source proyects which get abandoned
Posted on Reply
#22
medi01
The cluelessness levels in the comments around open source projects is astonishing.
Posted on Reply
#23
Mussels
Freshwater Moderator
medi01The cluelessness levels in the comments around open source projects is astonishing.
open source comments - plenty of contributors but little quality control
Posted on Reply
#24
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
medi01The cluelessness levels in the comments around open source projects is astonishing.
Sigh. Why the attitude? Also, can you elaborate? I assume you agree with this post:
krukUnlike proprietary garbage, open source cannot disappear. Please do educate yourself before embarrassing yourself further.
Which ... might be true after a fashion, but this:
Derek12Not true. There are many open source proyects which get abandoned
Is definitely true. Open source =! eternal development. Open source =! good development.
Posted on Reply
#25
medi01
Musselsopen source comments - plenty of contributors but little quality control
No.

You can create your own branch, but go try to slash n hack code in any project (I'm not even mentioning major projects).
FrickIs definitely true. Open source =! eternal development
It's about what happens when that non-eternal development ends.
And, as we have seen multiple times, effort is not lost, others can and, if there is interest, likely will, take over and continue the halted project.

The key about OS is openness. It can't disappear in principle.

Oh, and greedy m*ther**ckers are rather limited in misusing it for vendor locking the users.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 28th, 2024 22:56 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts