Sorry, I misread what you said about vectors. You said vector processing units. I agree.

Integrating more physics will make games so much more interesting. (Like eliminating the magical ability of players in FPS games to spin around and change directions after they’ve jumped and are in flight!)

Heh.

I agree that graphics cards have come a long way, but everything still goes through the CPU and that includes physics. The physics the programmers integrate into the engine are still very basic and are not even complete. There is still no concept of inertia, density, momentum built into the physics aspect of the engine because they take up too much processor usage.

Regardless, even with the “physics card” that is out there to supplement both the CPU and the GPU, every bit of the game engine must go through the CPU. Multiple CPUs allow the components of the engine to split up, allowing more processing power to go to those engine components, rather than having to allocate a certain amount of CPU to each aspect.

I agree as well that vectors will be more prominent in the future, but that’s just another aspect of physics that will get integrated into engines as computers come out with increasing number of processors. (In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn of separated RAM slots that are reserved for particular sets of CPUs.)

The bottom line for us geeks: Better, more realistic, therefore more fun, games!

Weebork on November 15, 2007 at 12:51 PM

Actually, I think we might see more general purpose vector processing units in the future… right now, we have already have physics cards and graphics cards, and we have people doing physics calculations on the graphics cards. I’d like to see something that is a bit more open to arbitrary uses.

dix point for game coolness
minus one million points for platform lameness

Need a version based on relativity. Now that’d be cool1

But, and maybe I’m being picky here, and of course I’m no physicist, but – what law of physics allows you to double tap an object and make it disappear? Cause, that would be useful in certain real life circumstances.

nailinmyeye on November 15, 2007 at 9:23 AM

Well a double tap can be the first step in making somebody disappear.

This would certainly make Tetris a little more interesting!

I think it is cool.

But, and maybe I’m being picky here, and of course I’m no physicist, but – what law of physics allows you to double tap an object and make it disappear? Cause, that would be useful in certain real life circumstances.

nailinmyeye on November 15, 2007 at 9:23 AM

I don’t know about anyone else but a double tap and ‘pfffft’ they are gone would be a handy thing to use on my favorite couple – Bill and Hillary.

But, what is persistently cool are the vector analysis, FLOPS, processor contortions thinga-ma-gigs required to handle the almost limitless variations for controlled behavior of apparent randomness.

Or not.

Just my observations

georgej on November 15, 2007 at 9:32 AM

I noticed that also as well as at one point a long lever didn’t quite act correctly. It had two thirds of it hanging out in the air and it didn’t pivot where it should have but in fact just sat there even when a weight was placed on the free end.

Not quite real life physics but cool none the less.

Why did this not come before the violent games the kids play today? We could have a generation of thinkers not blinkers with carpel thumb.

I hope it is not too late to get something like this into school curriculum-unless those that create the curriculum are lacking in creativity or want to play the existing games on school time so they can beat their children at home.

Just my observations