Talk:Havok (software)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of Mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

Contents

[edit] Unfair Article?

I linked to this article from the PhysX article. There, half the text and a number of the links were about Havok as a competitor. The Havok page, on the other hand, has absolutely no text about PhysX. I'm not certain if this discussion is the best place for this comment or the one for the other page, so I'll add to both.

[edit] Rename

It was suggested that this article should be renamed Havok. The vote is shown below:

  • I disagree. The Havok page already has information on the comic book character. The two topics are quite unrelated, so a merge would not work. No, I think it would be best if this page stays at Havok (software). — EagleOne\Talk 16:47, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
  • I Disagree, havok does not exclusively refer to that software nor is it the most common usage.Gateman1997 00:37, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I also disagree. Not most common usage. —Lowellian (reply) 18:47, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It's not the primary usage. K1Bond007 05:49, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. violet/riga (t) 13:43, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Havok on 360?

Perfect Dark Zero uses Havok right? It's listed. But Xbox 360 isn't listed as Havok compatible.--128.146.68.89 03:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Perfect Dark Zero does use Havok. Havok is X-360 compatibleSiofra 22:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halo 2

According to X-Play Bungee invented their own physics engine, so why is it on the list of games that use Havok? Playwrite 14:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

  • According to Bungie, they did invent their own the first time around, only to want for more physics interaction, and went with Havok. Bungie : Top Story Mhoskins 23:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Halo 3

I dont think bungie said anything about Halo 3's pysics engine. should it be removed, it is speculation.68.190.230.156 05:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Its written on the rear of the Halo 3 case that havok physics is being used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.125.72.136 (talk) 20:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Version Differences

Please add any known sources or information that describe the differences between the major versions of Havok. Thank you. 71.129.204.122 00:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pandemic studios and gears of war?

is this the engine being used in Gears of War?

No, and Epic developed Gears of War Siofra

[edit] comparison with other engines?

how does this compare with the Unreal Engine(s), past and present?

[edit] Long list of supported games moved

The L-O-N-G list of supported games was getting longer than the actual article - and kinda pointless. I moved the content over to List of games using physics engines - but to be honest, that list is also kinda pointless. If you want to continue adding to it - feel free. SteveBaker 14:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion

I'm putting this article up for speedy deletion, since it fulfills the requirements set out in Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements masquerading as articles. For example, it uses "we", which clearly indicates the content was written by the company. Benandorsqueaks 21:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, I realized I should just revert to previous edit. I should have checked that first. Benandorsqueaks 22:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Havok.com Inc.??

I'm not convinced that's the real name of the company, if it's incorporated in Ireland. "Inc." is an American thing. An Irish company would be "Ltd.", "Co. Ltd.", "PLC", or a few other things... --Zilog Jones 22:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

On closer inspection it's probably just whoever runs the website is "Havok.com Inc.", which would explain the ".com". The corporate information page on the website suggests the company name is "Telekinesys Research Ltd, t/a Havok", i.e. "trading as Havok". So there. --Zilog Jones 23:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] disambig + redirect

  • Havok physics should redirect here.
  • Havok should have a disambig pointing here. 71.116.132.235 22:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Intel Purchases Havok

Skywalker, May I please ask why my additions were pointless? I think that this purchase is worth noting on even if it is already avaliable on the Intel Website.--KevinTraver 20:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems like something that is more relevant on Havok (company). – Mipadi 23:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GPU Physics NOT DEAD

First off Havok FX is not cancelled, and secondly the link of AMDs Director is a personal utterance and should be regarded as such. Besides the most obvious fact that GPU Physics is the coming trend is seen in CryEngine 2 and their CryPhysics implementation which at the current state is about 2 or three years back from where Havok is nowadays. It is just that Multiple GPU installations aren`t established so far, for a magnitude of reasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.170.53.9 (talk) 17:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

However, looking at it from Intel's perspective, if games start using GPU-based physics in any numbers, it's just another nail in the coffin of their graphics ambitions. Intel graphics chips have such pathetic shader capabilities that there is no way that a decent GPU-physics engine will run on them - where both of their competitors (nVidia and ATI) are perfectly capable of doing that (even without dual-graphics hardware - I've played around with writing my own GPU physics (there is a demo of it included with the Bullet physics engine) and it's perfectly possible to share GPU performance between graphics and physics if that's of benefit to the application. Hence, it certainly wouldn't surprise me if Intel put pressure on their new subsidiary to tone down the enthusiasm for technologies that could put Intel even further out of the graphics market than they are now. Intel are working hard to increase their graphics chip capabilities - but the chances of them catching up with ATI & nVidia are small. SteveBaker (talk) 05:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removed list of game titles.

Back when there where a mere handful of titles using Havok, having a list of them made sense. Now there are hundreds of them with several more added every month. Our list will never be complete. If anyone thinks having such a list is in any way useful - make a separate 'List of...' article. All we really need here at this stage are a few NOTABLE examples - perhaps the first ever commercial game to use it and a couple of the most notable titles. If we do that, we should write it as a prose paragraph - not a list - or else the cruft-merchants will just add to it again.

Meanwhile - I did the "Be Bold" think and simply nuked the list.

SteveBaker (talk) 05:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Who wrote the table at the top?

Because anyone knows that 'PS3' and 'Xbox 360' are platforms, not types of OS --Topperfalkon (talk) 17:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not the person who wrote the table, but just to nitpick, do you know the names of the OSes for the Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii? I always assumed they were named after the systems... Xbox 360 OS, PS3 OS, and Wii OS. --Powerlord (talk) 22:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Havoklogo.gif

Image:Havoklogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)