[opensource-dev] Soft body physics

Glen Canaday gcanaday at gmail.com
Wed Apr 7 12:48:52 PDT 2010

I came to the same conclusion, with the exception that a lookahead for a 
collision would be helpful in the client. If they use the same physics 
engine and the client does no more than implement a collision check, I 
think it could be a good thing. I'm looking at several free physics 
engines atm and thought I would clear my thinking up some. Collisions 
with soft bodies deform the collision mesh itself so yeah it gets a 
little tricky when you split them.


On 04/07/2010 11:14 AM, Moriz Gupte wrote:
> I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client 
> side for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc...
> but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body 
> dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with.
> So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at 
> the same site.
> R
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday <gcanaday at gmail.com 
> <mailto:gcanaday at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the
>     rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this?
>     --GC
>     _______________________________________________
>     Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>     http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
>     Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated
>     posting privileges
> -- 
> 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.'
> Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State 
> University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333
> More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100407/8576fd90/attachment.htm 

More information about the opensource-dev mailing list