Nvidia has now put up the PhysX SDK on github for everyone to sink their teeth into, like with Unreal Engine it does require you agree to their EULA though, so it's not "free software".
Still a fantastic move, and shows many parts of the gaming industry are certainly starting to become more open.
Will be interesting to see if more Linux games use it in future now.
See their full post on it here on the official Nvidia website. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
QuoteThe PhysX software development kit (SDK) is already free on Windows platforms. We’re now extending this to include PhysX Clothing and PhysX Destruction, enabling game developers to easily create a more interactive gaming environment.
And starting this month, the PhysX SDK is available free with full source code for Windows, Linux, OSx and Android on https://github.com/NVIDIAGameWorks/PhysX
Still a fantastic move, and shows many parts of the gaming industry are certainly starting to become more open.
QuoteA major component of the NVIDIA GameWorks library, the latest PhysX version (3.3.3) is our best ever, with improved stability and performance. Features include constrained rigid body dynamics, collision detection, scene queries, character controller, particles, vehicles and much more.
Will be interesting to see if more Linux games use it in future now.
See their full post on it here on the official Nvidia website. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: MaelraneWell, I get it. Some people just switch to Linux for the bucks, not for its openness.You don't get it at all if you think money and idealism are the only valid reasons one could have for using Linux.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: tuubiQuoting: MaelraneWell, I get it. Some people just switch to Linux for the bucks, not for its openness.You don't get it at all if you think money and idealism are the only valid reasons one could have for using Linux.
Then enlighten me! What other reasons are there for *solely* using Linux and not having a dual-boot system?
0 Likes
Quoting: GuestQuoting: MaelraneWell, I get it. Some people just switch to Linux for the bucks, not for its openness.Some people want their computer to work, actually.
Come on, now it's stupid bashing.
Windows works. Of course sometimes you run into errors and stupid design decisions, but in the end it doesn't work worse than Linux for the average user.
I'm not talking about scientific approaches here, because that would turn out to be a bit silly in regards to gaming. The gaming-group is mostly made up by average users and they could game on Windows as good as (or even better than) on Linux.
I'm still waiting for comprehensible arguments for switching to Linux - coming from Windows - that do not involve in any way monetary thoughts nor idealism.
0 Likes
Quoting: MaelraneThen enlighten me! What other reasons are there for *solely* using Linux and not having a dual-boot system?That question answers itself. Why would you dual-boot if you don't need or want another, inferior (in my subjective opinion) OS on your system. Linux simply works better than the competition for many people. But this is getting way off topic. Par for the course for me I guess...
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: MaelraneThen enlighten me! What other reasons are there for *solely* using Linux and not having a dual-boot system?
I own Windows XP, XP64bit, and Windows 7 (I also own OSX from a few years ago) I don't, however, dual boot and use only an Arch Linux install. I'm also not particularly concerned with the whole proprietary/open source argument, I mean I wish I cared more but then I watch the news and realise that my care could be better directed somewhere else.
I just like to use a system that I have control of, that teaches me more about how computers work, and does not either get support dropped, or seem adamant to destroy my ssd drive, i.e. that works how I want it to, for as long as I want it to.
There are plenty of reasons that people use Linux, not just the free as in cash, or free as in freedom part of it.
2 Likes, Who?
Point taken.
A well, I have enough care for both here. I do care a lot about this world and many things that have nothing to do with computers.
But personally I think one can always make a difference, hence I try to choose the right thing for the majority (and myself) even in small things.
I do think that it would be a very, very bad development if companies like nvidia (once again) get a monopoly. Not just because of the gaming or other gpu-based things, but for the message it carries.
Whenever I have the chance to support open source, I do it. Be it with my own programming skills or via money or other means.
I'm an arch-user as well and I could not be bothered to use the proprietary drivers, neither on my notebook with an nvidia, nor on my desktop with and amd gpu. The proprietary amd drivers always performed worse for me and the updates on arch wouldn't go as smoothly as with the open source ones. For the nvidia ones the second argument still holds, so I always used the open source implementation.
Of course on my nvidia-rig I couldn't and can't play many games, but the notebook - although a gaming one - is outdated anyway, so I couldn't care less.
For university I had to reinstall a windows version because the game I'm working on has to be able to run on a windows-7 pc, else I fail the course.
Back to topic: I see things as Nvidia's PhysX very critically because it always only ran on their platform in an acceptable way. And I don't see this as an argument like "you may need a 120hz monitor to run this game", because every vendor could potentially create a 120hz monitor, while not every manufacturer can create a PhysX-card because it's proprietary technology.
And again: I don't think many people out there buy nvidia because they think "Hell ya, I want my games with PhysX, baby!", they buy for other reasons.
But if games (like Dungeon Defenders) can't be played on Linux with AMD in highend (progress-wise) then, because of PhysX I think it's time for this technology to die.
Quoting: rick01457I'm also not particularly concerned with the whole proprietary/open source argument, I mean I wish I cared more but then I watch the news and realise that my care could be better directed somewhere else.
A well, I have enough care for both here. I do care a lot about this world and many things that have nothing to do with computers.
But personally I think one can always make a difference, hence I try to choose the right thing for the majority (and myself) even in small things.
I do think that it would be a very, very bad development if companies like nvidia (once again) get a monopoly. Not just because of the gaming or other gpu-based things, but for the message it carries.
Whenever I have the chance to support open source, I do it. Be it with my own programming skills or via money or other means.
I'm an arch-user as well and I could not be bothered to use the proprietary drivers, neither on my notebook with an nvidia, nor on my desktop with and amd gpu. The proprietary amd drivers always performed worse for me and the updates on arch wouldn't go as smoothly as with the open source ones. For the nvidia ones the second argument still holds, so I always used the open source implementation.
Of course on my nvidia-rig I couldn't and can't play many games, but the notebook - although a gaming one - is outdated anyway, so I couldn't care less.
For university I had to reinstall a windows version because the game I'm working on has to be able to run on a windows-7 pc, else I fail the course.
Back to topic: I see things as Nvidia's PhysX very critically because it always only ran on their platform in an acceptable way. And I don't see this as an argument like "you may need a 120hz monitor to run this game", because every vendor could potentially create a 120hz monitor, while not every manufacturer can create a PhysX-card because it's proprietary technology.
And again: I don't think many people out there buy nvidia because they think "Hell ya, I want my games with PhysX, baby!", they buy for other reasons.
But if games (like Dungeon Defenders) can't be played on Linux with AMD in highend (progress-wise) then, because of PhysX I think it's time for this technology to die.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: GuestQuoting: MaelraneCome on, now it's stupid bashing.You’re obviously a Microsoft fanboy trolling for the fun of it, so I’ll just patiently wait for Liam to implement user blocking features…
Oo. What have I done to receive such harsh words? In case you wonder: I've not been using windows in over a year, until last week.
"Bashing" proprietary technology by a certain graphics-card manufacturer is now being the same as being a Microsoft fanboy trolling around? I guess it's really time for me to leave here. Have a wonderful Sunday everybody!
0 Likes
crunchpaste Mar 8, 2015
Quoting: MaelraneQuoting: tuubiQuoting: MaelraneWell, I get it. Some people just switch to Linux for the bucks, not for its openness.You don't get it at all if you think money and idealism are the only valid reasons one could have for using Linux.
Then enlighten me! What other reasons are there for *solely* using Linux and not having a dual-boot system?
Revivng laptops from 1998 seems to kinda impossible using Windows unless you're going for win98. Other than that.. mostly whatever Apple says to advertise their products - just works, no viruses, ease of use which translates into almost no time spent in maintaining my family's and my girlfriend's computers. My mother doesn't care if she uses Windows or Linux and certainly doesn't care if it is "free" or "free".
0 Likes
Quoting: crunchpasteQuoting: MaelraneQuoting: tuubiQuoting: MaelraneWell, I get it. Some people just switch to Linux for the bucks, not for its openness.You don't get it at all if you think money and idealism are the only valid reasons one could have for using Linux.
Then enlighten me! What other reasons are there for *solely* using Linux and not having a dual-boot system?
Revivng laptops from 1998 seems to kinda impossible using Windows unless you're going for win98. Other than that.. mostly whatever Apple says to advertise their products - just works, no viruses, ease of use which translates into almost no time spent in maintaining my family's and my girlfriend's computers. My mother doesn't care if she uses Windows or Linux and certainly doesn't care if it is "free" or "free".
Yes, but (I've not made this clear I guess, sorry) I was referring to the context of gaming. You would not play "today's" games with a 1998 laptop, no matter the operating system.
I - as a hardcore linux advocate - see no benefit in using linux for the purpose of gaming alone. Not today, not any time soon (although I'm hyped as you're).
Really, if gaming was that important to me I'd still have dual-bootet during the last year.
0 Likes
crunchpaste Mar 8, 2015
Quoting: MaelraneQuoting: crunchpasteQuoting: MaelraneQuoting: tuubiQuoting: MaelraneWell, I get it. Some people just switch to Linux for the bucks, not for its openness.You don't get it at all if you think money and idealism are the only valid reasons one could have for using Linux.
Then enlighten me! What other reasons are there for *solely* using Linux and not having a dual-boot system?
Revivng laptops from 1998 seems to kinda impossible using Windows unless you're going for win98. Other than that.. mostly whatever Apple says to advertise their products - just works, no viruses, ease of use which translates into almost no time spent in maintaining my family's and my girlfriend's computers. My mother doesn't care if she uses Windows or Linux and certainly doesn't care if it is "free" or "free".
Yes, but (I've not made this clear I guess, sorry) I was referring to the context of gaming. You would not play "today's" games with a 1998 laptop, no matter the operating system.
I - as a hardcore linux advocate - see no benefit in using linux for the purpose of gaming alone. Not today, not any time soon (although I'm hyped as you're).
Really, if gaming was that important to me I'd still have dual-bootet during the last year.
What I can think of right now is that you don't have to wonder if newer version of Direct3D is coming to your OS or not. I still remember visiting the Tropico5 Steam forums on Day1 as I had some minor problems with getting the game to actually run and there were an awful lot of threads demanding refunds and generally being rather verbally aggressive as the game wasn't compatible with XP and Vista... So I guess that's an advantage in terms of gaming?
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me