You don't want some unimportant background prop to consume more triangles than main player character. ![]() Not only 3d model can be too low quality, having too high quality can also be a problem. For example if you want a modular building parts some random assets created by different artists without targeting a specific game requirements will probably not be compatible with each other or building system in game. Not only in terms of art style, but also detail level and technical constraints. Major limitation to this idea is that for a decent looking game the assets need to be consistent. Note, in the video, how soft the suspensions are. ![]() Integration of stiff systems of differential equations is Not Fun. If you don't need real time, as for film work, it's not too bad. Also, you start to need double precision. This is possible, but the compute load suddenly jumps by orders of magnitude during some collisions. That's because you have to simulate what's happening on very short time scales, much shorter than a visual frame time. What's hard is doing things which have just a little elasticity. But everything looks like Jell-O, as some early Pixar devs wrote. ![]() If you make everything soft, that works OK. This is the main reason game simulations usually look wrong. This looks OK for small objects and terrible for large ones. It suffers from the "boink" problem in impulse-constraint systems, there are instantaneous changes in velocity on collisions. Totally rigid body physics is reasonably well solved by now. It's about typical for modern physics engines.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |