Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Physics and game engines | |
| Posted By: FoolsRun <s_weisgarber@yahoo.com> | Date: 1/29/07 9:16 a.m. |
In Response To: Physics and game engines (Rockslider) : Has anyone made comparisons in any depth? I'd be curious to read about that, : if anyone knows any good links. I'd like to know about differences between : this 'unreal engine' and whatever it was they used in H1. For that matter, : can anyone suggest any links to info about game engines in general, for : the casually interested? Halo 1 physics were created in house, while Halo 2 built upon the 3rd-party Havoc engine (Ducain was in error when he said "unreal"). Bungie scrapped their internal physics library because it wasn't robust enough for what they wanted in Halo 2, and would have required a major overhaul. They determined it would be in their best interest to purchase a tool geared specifically for physics, that had already gone through heavy testing and fine-tuning by both Havoc and other game developers that used the engine before them. Many people seem to blame Havoc for what they consider to be strange physics, but Havoc is just a library of routines; it's how you decide to implement that ultimately decides the "feel" of the game. With 2 major physics providers in the industry (Havoc and PhysX) that support multi-core programming, I think home-grown physics engines will become less common. To answer your questions, I'm not aware of any comparisons between the way physics behaved in the two games. You can find information on all sorts of gaming engines here.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |