Bobby5808
unread,Sep 12, 2009, 8:07:08 AM9/12/09Sign in to reply to author
Sign in to forward
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to Physics2D.Net
Yup it does all that. In fact I think most physics engines will do all
that.
Here are some other things to look for in a physics engine from my
experience:
If you are developing for a platform other than PC make sure you look
for a physics engine that is optimized for that platform. Lots of
physics engines really battle on XBOX because it uses different
numbers or something, but an engine optimised for XBOX runs just fine.
Farseer is an example for XBOX.
If you are going to have small objects moving really fast in respect
to the other objects use an engine that has Continuous Collision
Detection(CCD) so they dont go through each other. BOX2D allows you to
set which objects use CCD, but if you use it on a lot of objects its
really CPU expensive.
Some engines like BOX2D are faster and you don't have to worry about
grid-spacing, but they only support convex shapes. You can get around
this though using convex decomposition, but its up to you to decide
what you're going to need.
Thats about all I can think of, other than that an open source project
is probably better, because you can see everything that is going on
and make any changes you want.
Physics2D has been good for me, the only major problem I have is that
it uses a distance-grid, which has to be recalculated each time I
change a shape.
Anyway I hope I helped, Cheers!