Deprecated Technologies

Out of interested I wondered when was the last time you ran a game that had an option to enable :

A : Nvidia Physx
Assuming the list is somewhat correct, I don't think I would consider PhysX an EOL technology since it is still implemented in quite a few games.

Also used in some professional environments and applications.
Other software with PhysX support includes:

 
Last edited:
Depre_cia_ted or depre_ca_ted?

Not sure everyone's talking about the same thing and no clarification from @Davros which he intended. I'm going to make an executive decision to edit the title to Deprecated but can change back if wanted.
Well since my comedy attempts only seem to lead to misery, I'll just take a shot at meta-discussion to avoid actual input for the thread.

What is the actual conflict you see with the terms? I understood the original intent of Davros as "what existing capabilities you don't see anymore implemented in games". Does this not cover both depreciated (you have a capability that has lost its value) and deprecated (capability exists but its use is no longer recommended)?

Thus, strictly talking, features that are no longer even supported at all by current hardware would be off topic here. Because such stuff is not what "deprecated" means.
 
Well since my comedy attempts only seem to lead to misery, I'll just take a shot at meta-discussion to avoid actual input for the thread.

What is the actual conflict you see with the terms? I understood the original intent of Davros as "what existing capabilities you don't see anymore implemented in games". Does this not cover both depreciated (you have a capability that has lost its value) and deprecated (capability exists but its use is no longer recommended)?

Thus, strictly talking, features that are no longer even supported at all by current hardware would be off topic here. Because such stuff is not what "deprecated" means.

Just for clarification, deprecated is technically correct.


to withdraw official support for or discourage the use of (something, such as a software product) in favor of a newer or better alternative

Withdrawing official support is effectively rendering something as no longer supported. :)

Depreciated on the other hand is basically a reduction in the value of something.


While it's true that something that is no longer supported has likely depreciated in value to zero (albeit I'd imagine that those features are still "appreciated" by people still using them so many of those features still haven't depreciated to zero), I'd say deprecated is the more accurate description for something like that.

Regards,
SB
 
Nobody's mentioned this so far but Autodesk has stopped actively supporting Scaleform over 5 years ago yet the Adobe flash-based 3D UI/HUD rendering middleware still manages to be shipped in the latest games today like Starfield! Scary how a doubly deprecated technology (Flash & Scaleform) still manages to stay relevant in game development despite being closed source and combined with the fact that the original author's don't want anything to do with it anymore ...
 
I suppose I better try and clear up the confusion: (maybe I used the wrong word)
I dont mean not appreciated as in not liked, I mean no longer used, for example nvidia physx afaik the last game I remember having the option to enable it was one of the batman games its been a few years since ive seen a game that had an enable physx option, again afaik games are using software physics or using some sort of compute shader or opencl or cuda or direct compute or physics middleware that uses those api's. Even though nvidia still support it I dont think any recent games use it. Can anyone name a game released in the last 2 years that uses physx ?
 
Just for clarification, deprecated is technically correct.
Yes, it is technically correct for something that _can_ still be done but is discouraged. That is what I meant as well.
But things that aren't even implemented at all nowadays anymore (like the old environmental audio APIs etc) fall into a deeper pit than just "deprecated".
 
@pharma , that list shows 2023 releases on it but it does not differentiate between cpu physx and gpu physx
ps: nvidia still support physx
I'm wondering if any recent games use gpu physx , as I said earlier the last game I recall having an option to enable gpu physx was Batman Arkham City
Latest Nvidia drivers
1697853894849.png
cant say for certain but i'm sure that option is also available to owners of 40 series cards
 
Last edited:
@pharma , that list shows 2023 releases on it but it does not differentiate between cpu physx and gpu physx
ps: nvidia still support physx
I'm wondering if any recent games use gpu physx , as I said earlier the last game I recall having an option to enable gpu physx was Batman Arkham City
Latest Nvidia drivers
View attachment 9842
cant say for certain but i'm sure that option is also available to owners of 40 series cards
Currently PhysX using CPU can be as performant as running on a GPU using CUDA api.
CPU's are powerful enough that the option to select either gpu or cpu is no longer required.

Edit: PhysX can also be installed separately. I think it has been a while since the current version you install with game drivers has changed, but you can always download a standalone PhysX package, but don't think there will be any performance difference.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top